Is the Computation of Abstract Sameness Relations Human-Like in Neural Language Models?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In recent years, deep neural language models have made strong progress in various NLP tasks. This work explores one facet of the question whether state-of-the-art NLP models exhibit elementary mechanisms known from human cognition. The exploration is focused on a relatively primitive mechanism for which there is a lot of evidence from various psycholinguistic experiments with infants. The computation of "abstract sameness relations" is assumed to play an important role in human language acquisition and processing, especially in learning more complex grammar rules. In order to investigate this mechanism in BERT and other pre-trained language models (PLMs), the experiment designs from studies with infants were taken as the starting point. On this basis, we designed experimental settings in which each element from the original studies was mapped to a component of language models. Even though the task in our experiments was relatively simple, the results suggest that the cognitive faculty of computing abstract sameness relations is stronger in infants than in all investigated PLMs.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2022.
Builds on
30 of 59 references.
References · 30
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,046
- 2015Aligning Books and Movies: Towards Story-like Visual Explanations by Watching Movies and Reading Bookscited by 1,041
- 2020A Primer in BERTology: What we know about how BERT workscited by 807
- 2019Linguistic Knowledge and Transferability of Contextual Representationscited by 382
- 2016Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependenciescited by 350
- 2019What BERT is not: Lessons from a new suite of psycholinguistic diagnostics for language modelscited by 317
- 2020COGS: A Compositional Generalization Challenge Based on Semantic Interpretationcited by 260
- 2018Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 239
- 2018Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchicallycited by 210
- 2019Assessing BERT's Syntactic Abilitiescited by 191
- 2019Good-Enough Compositional Data Augmentationcited by 158
18 more
- 2020Compositional Generalization and Natural Language Variation: Can a Semantic Parsing Approach Handle Both?cited by 147
- 2019Neural Language Models as Psycholinguistic Subjects: Representations of Syntactic Statecited by 137
- 2019Open Sesame: Getting Inside BERT's Linguistic Knowledgecited by 119
- 2018What do RNN Language Models Learn about Filler-Gap Dependencies?cited by 86
- 2020Span-based Semantic Parsing for Compositional Generalizationcited by 77
- 2020Learning to Recombine and Resample Data for Compositional Generalizationcited by 65
- 2021Meta-Learning to Compositionally Generalizecited by 62
- 2019Investigating BERT's Knowledge of Language: Five Analysis Methods with NPIscited by 58
- 2019Compositional generalization in a deep seq2seq model by separating syntax and semanticscited by 56
- 2019Compositional Generalization for Primitive Substitutionscited by 48
- 2021Examining the Inductive Bias of Neural Language Models with Artificial Languagescited by 40
- 2019Studying the Inductive Biases of RNNs with Synthetic Variations of Natural Languagescited by 37
- 2020Understanding Human Intelligence through Human Limitationscited by 33
- 2018Why Self-Attention? A Targeted Evaluation of Neural Machine Translation Architecturescited by 30
- 2015Tree-structured composition in neural networks without tree-structured architecturescited by 23
- 2017The Galactic Dependencies Treebanks: Getting More Data by Synthesizing New Languagescited by 19
- 2018Distinct patterns of syntactic agreement errors in recurrent networks and humanscited by 13
- 2020Transformer-Based Neural Text Generation with Syntactic Guidancecited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.