mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Inflecting when there's no majority: Limitations of encoder-decoder neural networks as cognitive models for German plurals

arXiv 2005.08826 ↗First posted 18 May 2020cs.CLcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Can artificial neural networks learn to represent inflectional morphology and generalize to new words as human speakers do? Kirov and Cotterell (2018) argue that the answer is yes: modern Encoder-Decoder (ED) architectures learn human-like behavior when inflecting English verbs, such as extending the regular past tense form -(e)d to novel words. However, their work does not address the criticism raised by Marcus et al. (1995): that neural models may learn to extend not the regular, but the most frequent class -- and thus fail on tasks like German number inflection, where infrequent suffixes like -s can still be productively generalized. To investigate this question, we first collect a new dataset from German speakers (production and ratings of plural forms for novel nouns) that is designed to avoid sources of information unavailable to the ED model. The speaker data show high variability, and two suffixes evince 'regular' behavior, appearing more often with phonologically atypical inputs. Encoder-decoder models do generalize the most frequently produced plural class, but do not show human-like variability or 'regular' extension of these other plural markers. We conclude that modern neural models may still struggle with minority-class generalization.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 May 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 3; 2023: 3; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

13 papers.

Sort: