mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Integrating Linguistic Theory and Neural Language Models

arXiv 2207.09643 ↗First posted 20 Jul 2022cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Transformer-based language models have recently achieved remarkable results in many natural language tasks. However, performance on leaderboards is generally achieved by leveraging massive amounts of training data, and rarely by encoding explicit linguistic knowledge into neural models. This has led many to question the relevance of linguistics for modern natural language processing. In this dissertation, I present several case studies to illustrate how theoretical linguistics and neural language models are still relevant to each other. First, language models are useful to linguists by providing an objective tool to measure semantic distance, which is difficult to do using traditional methods. On the other hand, linguistic theory contributes to language modelling research by providing frameworks and sources of data to probe our language models for specific aspects of language understanding. This thesis contributes three studies that explore different aspects of the syntax-semantics interface in language models. In the first part of my thesis, I apply language models to the problem of word class flexibility. Using mBERT as a source of semantic distance measurements, I present evidence in favour of analyzing word class flexibility as a directional process. In the second part of my thesis, I propose a method to measure surprisal at intermediate layers of language models. My experiments show that sentences containing morphosyntactic anomalies trigger surprisals earlier in language models than semantic and commonsense anomalies. Finally, in the third part of my thesis, I adapt several psycholinguistic studies to show that language models contain knowledge of argument structure constructions. In summary, my thesis develops new connections between natural language processing, linguistic theory, and psycholinguistics to provide fresh perspectives for the interpretation of language models.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 183 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Jul 2022.

Builds on

15 of 183 references.

References · 15

  1. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  2. 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,346
  3. 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
  4. 2019HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processingcited by 2,201
  5. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
  6. 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,046
  7. 2019Linguistic Knowledge and Transferability of Contextual Representationscited by 382
  8. 2021Post-hoc Interpretability for Neural NLP: A Surveycited by 155
  9. 2020When Do You Need Billions of Words of Pretraining Data?cited by 104
  10. 2019Distributional Semantics and Linguistic Theorycited by 53
  11. 2021On the proper role of linguistically-oriented deep net analysis in linguistic theorizingcited by 43
  12. 2020A Benchmark of Medical Out of Distribution Detectioncited by 40
3 more
  1. 2021The Dangers of Underclaiming: Reasons for Caution When Reporting How NLP Systems Failcited by 38
  2. 2021How is BERT surprised? Layerwise detection of linguistic anomaliescited by 24
  3. 2020Word class flexibility: A deep contextualized approachcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.