mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Pragmatic Constraint on Distributional Semantics

arXiv 2211.11041 ↗First posted 20 Nov 2022cs.CL cs.AI cs.ITcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper studies the limits of language models' statistical learning in the context of Zipf's law. First, we demonstrate that Zipf-law token distribution emerges irrespective of the chosen tokenization. Second, we show that Zipf distribution is characterized by two distinct groups of tokens that differ both in terms of their frequency and their semantics. Namely, the tokens that have a one-to-one correspondence with one semantic concept have different statistical properties than those with semantic ambiguity. Finally, we demonstrate how these properties interfere with statistical learning procedures motivated by distributional semantics.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2022.

Builds on

6 of 24 references.

References · 6

  1. 2016Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translationcited by 1,475
  2. 2018Subword Regularization: Improving Neural Network Translation Models with Multiple Subword Candidatescited by 639
  3. 2017Do Neural Nets Learn Statistical Laws behind Natural Language?cited by 16
  4. 2021How (Non-)Optimal is the Lexicon?cited by 11
  5. 2017The origins of Zipf's meaning-frequency lawcited by 7
  6. 2021Modeling the Unigram Distributioncited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.