Is neural language acquisition similar to natural? A chronological probing study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The probing methodology allows one to obtain a partial representation of linguistic phenomena stored in the inner layers of the neural network, using external classifiers and statistical analysis. Pre-trained transformer-based language models are widely used both for natural language understanding (NLU) and natural language generation (NLG) tasks making them most commonly used for downstream applications. However, little analysis was carried out, whether the models were pre-trained enough or contained knowledge correlated with linguistic theory. We are presenting the chronological probing study of transformer English models such as MultiBERT and T5. We sequentially compare the information about the language learned by the models in the process of training on corpora. The results show that 1) linguistic information is acquired in the early stages of training 2) both language models demonstrate capabilities to capture various features from various levels of language, including morphology, syntax, and even discourse, while they also can inconsistently fail on tasks that are perceived as easy. We also introduce the open-source framework for chronological probing research, compatible with other transformer-based models. https://github.com/EkaterinaVoloshina/chronological_probing
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jul 2022.
Builds on
21 of 42 references.
References · 21
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,304
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,549
- 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,379
- 2016Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Informationcited by 1,581
- 2015Aligning Books and Movies: Towards Story-like Visual Explanations by Watching Movies and Reading Bookscited by 1,042
- 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 850
- 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 620
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 557
- 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 455
- 2019What do you learn from context? Probing for sentence structure in contextualized word representationscited by 437
- 2018SentEval: An Evaluation Toolkit for Universal Sentence Representationscited by 294
- 2020Information-Theoretic Probing with Minimum Description Lengthcited by 231
9 more
- 2020Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic Structurecited by 205
- 2019BERTs of a feather do not generalize together: Large variability in generalization across models with similar test set performancecited by 89
- 2021The MultiBERTs: BERT Reproductions for Robustness Analysiscited by 89
- 2021Probing Across Time: What Does RoBERTa Know and When?cited by 73
- 2018Evaluating Layers of Representation in Neural Machine Translation on Part-of-Speech and Semantic Tagging Taskscited by 56
- 2020Pretrained Language Model Embryology: The Birth of ALBERTcited by 30
- 2019Evaluation Benchmarks and Learning Criteria for Discourse-Aware Sentence Representationscited by 21
- 2018Like a Baby: Visually Situated Neural Language Acquisitioncited by 5
- 2021Morph Call: Probing Morphosyntactic Content of Multilingual Transformerscited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 1.
3 papers.