mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Uncovering Constraint-Based Behavior in Neural Models via Targeted Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2106.01207 ↗First posted 2 Jun 2021cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A growing body of literature has focused on detailing the linguistic knowledge embedded in large, pretrained language models. Existing work has shown that non-linguistic biases in models can drive model behavior away from linguistic generalizations. We hypothesized that competing linguistic processes within a language, rather than just non-linguistic model biases, could obscure underlying linguistic knowledge. We tested this claim by exploring a single phenomenon in four languages: English, Chinese, Spanish, and Italian. While human behavior has been found to be similar across languages, we find cross-linguistic variation in model behavior. We show that competing processes in a language act as constraints on model behavior and demonstrate that targeted fine-tuning can re-weight the learned constraints, uncovering otherwise dormant linguistic knowledge in models. Our results suggest that models need to learn both the linguistic constraints in a language and their relative ranking, with mismatches in either producing non-human-like behavior.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2021.

Builds on

26 of 55 references.

References · 26

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 864
  4. 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 608
  5. 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 553
  6. 2020Null It Out: Guarding Protected Attributes by Iterative Nullspace Projectioncited by 442
  7. 2016Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependenciescited by 350
  8. 2019What BERT is not: Lessons from a new suite of psycholinguistic diagnostics for language modelscited by 317
  9. 2020Revisiting Pre-Trained Models for Chinese Natural Language Processingcited by 262
  10. 2020Experience Grounds Languagecited by 241
  11. 2018Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 239
  12. 2018Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchicallycited by 210
14 more
  1. 2020A Systematic Assessment of Syntactic Generalization in Neural Language Modelscited by 163
  2. 2020Are Natural Language Inference Models IMPPRESsive? Learning IMPlicature and PRESuppositioncited by 76
  3. 2019Investigating BERT's Knowledge of Language: Five Analysis Methods with NPIscited by 58
  4. 2020Cross-Linguistic Syntactic Evaluation of Word Prediction Modelscited by 54
  5. 2020Exploring BERT's Sensitivity to Lexical Cues using Tests from Semantic Primingcited by 41
  6. 2019Studying the Inductive Biases of RNNs with Synthetic Variations of Natural Languagescited by 37
  7. 2018Revisiting the poverty of the stimulus: hierarchical generalization without a hierarchical bias in recurrent neural networkscited by 33
  8. 2019Using Priming to Uncover the Organization of Syntactic Representations in Neural Language Modelscited by 29
  9. 2020Recurrent Neural Network Language Models Always Learn English-Like Relative Clause Attachmentcited by 18
  10. 2018Can LSTM Learn to Capture Agreement? The Case of Basquecited by 17
  11. 2019Harnessing the linguistic signal to predict scalar inferencescited by 17
  12. 2020Discourse structure interacts with reference but not syntax in neural language modelscited by 17
  13. 2020Learning Which Features Matter: RoBERTa Acquires a Preference for Linguistic Generalizations (Eventually)cited by 12
  14. 2019A Critical Analysis of Biased Parsers in Unsupervised Parsingcited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.

5 papers.