mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Are word boundaries useful for unsupervised language learning?

arXiv 2210.02956 ↗First posted 6 Oct 2022cs.CLcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Word or word-fragment based Language Models (LM) are typically preferred over character-based ones in many downstream applications. This may not be surprising as words seem more linguistically relevant units than characters. Words provide at least two kinds of relevant information: boundary information and meaningful units. However, word boundary information may be absent or unreliable in the case of speech input (word boundaries are not marked explicitly in the speech stream). Here, we systematically compare LSTMs as a function of the input unit (character, phoneme, word, word part), with or without gold boundary information. We probe linguistic knowledge in the networks at the lexical, syntactic and semantic levels using three speech-adapted black box NLP psycholinguistically-inpired benchmarks (pWUGGY, pBLIMP, pSIMI). We find that the absence of boundaries costs between 2% and 28% in relative performance depending on the task. We show that gold boundaries can be replaced by automatically found ones obtained with an unsupervised segmentation algorithm, and that even modest segmentation performance gives a gain in performance on two of the three tasks compared to basic character/phone based models without boundary information.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2022.

Builds on

19 of 37 references.

References · 19

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  3. 2020wav2vec 2.0: A Framework for Self-Supervised Learning of Speech Representationscited by 3,905
  4. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
  5. 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,811
  6. 2018Deep contextualized word representationscited by 2,290
  7. 2019Transformer-XL: Attentive Language Models Beyond a Fixed-Length Contextcited by 1,850
  8. 2019fairseq: A Fast, Extensible Toolkit for Sequence Modelingcited by 1,488
  9. 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
  10. 2016Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependenciescited by 354
  11. 2018Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchicallycited by 213
  12. 2019Assessing BERT's Syntactic Abilitiescited by 192
7 more
  1. 2020Byte Pair Encoding is Suboptimal for Language Model Pretrainingcited by 192
  2. 2014SimLex-999: Evaluating Semantic Models with (Genuine) Similarity Estimationcited by 172
  3. 2019Effectiveness of self-supervised pre-training for speech recognitioncited by 72
  4. 2018Speech2Vec: A Sequence-to-Sequence Framework for Learning Word Embeddings from Speechcited by 52
  5. 2016SimVerb-3500: A Large-Scale Evaluation Set of Verb Similaritycited by 44
  6. 2018Can LSTM Learn to Capture Agreement? The Case of Basquecited by 17
  7. 2019Tabula nearly rasa: Probing the Linguistic Knowledge of Character-Level Neural Language Models Trained on Unsegmented Textcited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 5; 2025: 1.

8 papers.