The Latent Structure of Dictionaries
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
How many words (and which ones) are sufficient to define all other words? When dictionaries are analyzed as directed graphs with links from defining words to defined words, they reveal a latent structure. Recursively removing all words that are reachable by definition but that do not define any further words reduces the dictionary to a Kernel of about 10%. This is still not the smallest number of words that can define all the rest. About 75% of the Kernel turns out to be its Core, a Strongly Connected Subset of words with a definitional path to and from any pair of its words and no word's definition depending on a word outside the set. But the Core cannot define all the rest of the dictionary. The 25% of the Kernel surrounding the Core consists of small strongly connected subsets of words: the Satellites. The size of the smallest set of words that can define all the rest (the graph's Minimum Feedback Vertex Set or MinSet) is about 1% of the dictionary, 15% of the Kernel, and half-Core, half-Satellite. But every dictionary has a huge number of MinSets. The Core words are learned earlier, more frequent, and less concrete than the Satellites, which in turn are learned earlier and more frequent but more concrete than the rest of the Dictionary. In principle, only one MinSet's words would need to be grounded through the sensorimotor capacity to recognize and categorize their referents. In a dual-code sensorimotor-symbolic model of the mental lexicon, the symbolic code could do all the rest via re-combinatory definition.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Nov 2014.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 2; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
9 papers.
- 2024Language Writ Large: LLMs, ChatGPT, Grounding, Meaning and Understandingcited by 12
- 2025Psycholinguistic Word Features: a New Approach for the Evaluation of LLMs Alignment with Humanscited by 5
- 2021Evaluating Models of Robust Word Recognition with Serial Reproductioncited by 2
- 2023Emergence of Symbols in Neural Networks for Semantic Understanding and Communicationcited by 2
- 2024Unsupervised, Bottom-up Category Discovery for Symbol Grounding with a Curious Robotcited by 2
- 2023On the Computational Modeling of Meaning: Embodied Cognition Intertwined with Emotioncited by 1
- 2026The role of System 1 and System 2 semantic memory structure in human and LLM biasescited by 1
- 2021Language Acquisition is Embodied, Interactive, Emotive: a Research Proposalcited by 0
- 2025A Unified Formal Theory on the Logical Limits of Symbol Groundingcited by 0
- 2026The role of System 1 and System 2 semantic memory structure in human and LLM biases14 Apr 2026
- 2025A Unified Formal Theory on the Logical Limits of Symbol Grounding24 Sep 2025
- 2025Psycholinguistic Word Features: a New Approach for the Evaluation of LLMs Alignment with Humans29 May 2025
- 2024Unsupervised, Bottom-up Category Discovery for Symbol Grounding with a Curious Robot3 Apr 2024
- 2024Language Writ Large: LLMs, ChatGPT, Grounding, Meaning and Understanding3 Feb 2024
- 2023On the Computational Modeling of Meaning: Embodied Cognition Intertwined with Emotion10 Jul 2023
- 2023Emergence of Symbols in Neural Networks for Semantic Understanding and Communication13 Apr 2023
- 2021Language Acquisition is Embodied, Interactive, Emotive: a Research Proposal10 May 2021
- 2021Evaluating Models of Robust Word Recognition with Serial Reproduction24 Jan 2021