mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Experimental Contexts Can Facilitate Robust Semantic Property Inference in Language Models, but Inconsistently

arXiv 2401.06640 ↗First posted 12 Jan 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent zero-shot evaluations have highlighted important limitations in the abilities of language models (LMs) to perform meaning extraction. However, it is now well known that LMs can demonstrate radical improvements in the presence of experimental contexts such as in-context examples and instructions. How well does this translate to previously studied meaning-sensitive tasks? We present a case-study on the extent to which experimental contexts can improve LMs' robustness in performing property inheritance -- predicting semantic properties of novel concepts, a task that they have been previously shown to fail on. Upon carefully controlling the nature of the in-context examples and the instructions, our work reveals that they can indeed lead to non-trivial property inheritance behavior in LMs. However, this ability is inconsistent: with a minimal reformulation of the task, some LMs were found to pick up on shallow, non-semantic heuristics from their inputs, suggesting that the computational principles of semantic property inference are yet to be mastered by LMs.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Jan 2024.

Builds on

22 of 37 references.

References · 22

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  3. 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
  4. 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 876
  5. 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
  6. 2016Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependenciescited by 354
  7. 2019What BERT is not: Lessons from a new suite of psycholinguistic diagnostics for language modelscited by 320
  8. 2018Colorless green recurrent networks dream hierarchicallycited by 213
  9. 2020A Systematic Assessment of Syntactic Generalization in Neural Language Modelscited by 165
  10. 2019Neural Language Models as Psycholinguistic Subjects: Representations of Syntactic Statecited by 138
  11. 2020Does syntax need to grow on trees? Sources of hierarchical inductive bias in sequence-to-sequence networkscited by 72
  12. 2022minicons: Enabling Flexible Behavioral and Representational Analyses of Transformer Language Modelscited by 58
10 more
  1. 2023Measuring Inductive Biases of In-Context Learning with Underspecified Demonstrationscited by 49
  2. 2021Structural Persistence in Language Models: Priming as a Window into Abstract Language Representationscited by 44
  3. 2022The Better Your Syntax, the Better Your Semantics? Probing Pretrained Language Models for the English Comparative Correlativecited by 35
  4. 2021Back to Square One: Artifact Detection, Training and Commonsense Disentanglement in the Winograd Schemacited by 32
  5. 2022Coloring the Blank Slate: Pre-training Imparts a Hierarchical Inductive Bias to Sequence-to-sequence Modelscited by 28
  6. 2021Sorting through the noise: Testing robustness of information processing in pre-trained language modelscited by 27
  7. 2022When a sentence does not introduce a discourse entity, Transformer-based models still sometimes refer to itcited by 23
  8. 2022Language model acceptability judgements are not always robust to contextcited by 22
  9. 2023In-context Learning Generalizes, But Not Always Robustly: The Case of Syntaxcited by 22
  10. 2019Hierarchical Representation in Neural Language Models: Suppression and Recovery of Expectationscited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year

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

3 papers.