mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Language models are better than humans at next-token prediction

arXiv 2212.11281 ↗First posted 21 Dec 2022cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Current language models are considered to have sub-human capabilities at natural language tasks like question-answering or writing code. However, language models are not trained to perform well at these tasks, they are trained to accurately predict the next token given previous tokes in tokenized text. It is not clear whether language models are better or worse than humans at next token prediction. To try to answer this question, we performed two distinct experiments to directly compare humans and language models on this front: one measuring top-1 accuracy and the other measuring perplexity. In both experiments, we find humans to be consistently worse than even relatively small language models like GPT3-Ada at next-token prediction.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Dec 2022.

Builds on

4 of 17 references.

References · 4

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
  3. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,346
  4. 2013One Billion Word Benchmark for Measuring Progress in Statistical Language Modelingcited by 302

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 8; 2026: 1.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area: