mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Ability and Limitations of Transformers to Recognize Formal Languages

arXiv 2009.11264 ↗First posted 23 Sep 2020cs.CL cs.LGcited by 12

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Transformers have supplanted recurrent models in a large number of NLP tasks. However, the differences in their abilities to model different syntactic properties remain largely unknown. Past works suggest that LSTMs generalize very well on regular languages and have close connections with counter languages. In this work, we systematically study the ability of Transformers to model such languages as well as the role of its individual components in doing so. We first provide a construction of Transformers for a subclass of counter languages, including well-studied languages such as n-ary Boolean Expressions, Dyck-1, and its generalizations. In experiments, we find that Transformers do well on this subclass, and their learned mechanism strongly correlates with our construction. Perhaps surprisingly, in contrast to LSTMs, Transformers do well only on a subset of regular languages with degrading performance as we make languages more complex according to a well-known measure of complexity. Our analysis also provides insights on the role of self-attention mechanism in modeling certain behaviors and the influence of positional encoding schemes on the learning and generalization abilities of the model.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2020.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 4; 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 5; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

12 papers.