# Are we there yet? Encoder-decoder neural networks as cognitive models of English past tense inflection

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.01280 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.01280/

## Key facts

- Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2019.

## Built on by (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [State-of-the-art generalisation research in NLP: A taxonomy and review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03050/) (2022)
- [Why Linguistics Will Thrive in the 21st Century: A Reply to Piantadosi (2023)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03228/) (2023)
- [Did AI get more negative recently?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.13610/) (2022)
- [Is deeper always better? Replacing linear mappings with deep learning networks in the Discriminative Lexicon Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.04259/) (2024)
- [The Greedy and Recursive Search for Morphological Productivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.05790/) (2021)
- [Computational Morphology with Neural Network Approaches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.09404/) (2021)
- [Not quite there yet: Combining analogical patterns and encoder-decoder networks for cognitively plausible inflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.03968/) (2021)
- [A Comprehensive Comparison of Neural Networks as Cognitive Models of Inflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.12321/) (2022)
- [Character-aware Transformers Learn an Irregular Morphological Pattern Yet None Generalize Like Humans](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14100/) (2026)
- [Falling Through the Gaps: Neural Architectures as Models of Morphological Rule Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03710/) (2021)
- [LLMs' morphological analyses of complex FST-generated Finnish words](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08269/) (2024)
- [How do we get there? Evaluating transformer neural networks as cognitive models for English past tense inflection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09167/) (2022)
- [Evaluating Transformer Models and Human Behaviors on Chinese Character Naming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12294/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The cognitive mechanisms needed to account for the English past tense have long been a subject of debate in linguistics and cognitive science. Neural network models were proposed early on, but were shown to have clear flaws. Recently, however, Kirov and Cotterell (2018) showed that modern encoder-decoder (ED) models overcome many of these flaws. They also presented evidence that ED models demonstrate humanlike performance in a nonce-word task. Here, we look more closely at the behaviour of their model in this task. We find that (1) the model exhibits instability across multiple simulations in terms of its correlation with human data, and (2) even when results are aggregated across simulations (treating each simulation as an individual human participant), the fit to the human data is not strong---worse than an older rule-based model. These findings hold up through several alternative training regimes and evaluation measures. Although other neural architectures might do better, we conclude that there is still insufficient evidence to claim that neural nets are a good cognitive model for this task.