mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Frequency Explains the Inverse Correlation of Large Language Models' Size, Training Data Amount, and Surprisal's Fit to Reading Times

arXiv 2402.02255 ↗First posted 3 Feb 2024cs.CL cs.LGcited by 39

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent studies have shown that as Transformer-based language models become larger and are trained on very large amounts of data, the fit of their surprisal estimates to naturalistic human reading times degrades. The current work presents a series of analyses showing that word frequency is a key explanatory factor underlying these two trends. First, residual errors from four language model families on four corpora show that the inverse correlation between model size and fit to reading times is the strongest on the subset of least frequent words, which is driven by excessively accurate predictions of larger model variants. Additionally, training dynamics reveal that during later training steps, all model variants learn to predict rare words and that larger model variants do so more accurately, which explains the detrimental effect of both training data amount and model size on fit to reading times. Finally, a feature attribution analysis demonstrates that larger model variants are able to accurately predict rare words based on both an effectively longer context window size as well as stronger local associations compared to smaller model variants. Taken together, these results indicate that Transformer-based language models' surprisal estimates diverge from human-like expectations due to the superhumanly complex associations they learn for predicting rare words.

Key facts. Cited by 39 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2024.

Builds on

17 of 38 references.

References · 17

  1. 2022OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Modelscited by 3,512
  2. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
  3. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  4. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  5. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  6. 2022GPT-NeoX-20B: An Open-Source Autoregressive Language Modelcited by 713
  7. 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 476
  8. 2022Why Does Surprisal From Larger Transformer-Based Language Models Provide a Poorer Fit to Human Reading Times?cited by 113
  9. 2022Training Trajectories of Language Models Across Scalescited by 81
  10. 2023Testing the Predictions of Surprisal Theory in 11 Languagescited by 77
  11. 2021Lower Perplexity is Not Always Human-Likecited by 52
  12. 2018Finding Syntax in Human Encephalography with Beam Searchcited by 41
5 more
  1. 2023Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human Reading Times Best with About Two Billion Training Tokenscited by 41
  2. 2017The Natural Stories Corpuscited by 40
  3. 2023Characterizing Learning Curves During Language Model Pre-Training: Learning, Forgetting, and Stabilitycited by 35
  4. 2022Context Limitations Make Neural Language Models More Human-Likecited by 34
  5. 2021Local word statistics affect reading times independently of surprisalcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 7; 2025: 13; 2026: 19.

39 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2025Seq vs Seq: An Open Suite of Paired Encoders and Decoderscited by 38
  2. 2024Filtered Corpus Training (FiCT) Shows that Language Models can Generalize from Indirect Evidencecited by 35
  3. 2025Large Language Models Are Human-Like Internallycited by 29
  4. 2024On the Role of Context in Reading Time Predictioncited by 20
  5. 2024Emergent Word Order Universals from Cognitively-Motivated Language Modelscited by 11
  6. 2025To model human linguistic prediction, make LLMs less superhumancited by 11
  7. 2024What Goes Into a LM Acceptability Judgment? Rethinking the Impact of Frequency and Lengthcited by 10
  8. 2025Language Models Grow Less Humanlike beyond Phase Transitioncited by 10
  9. 2024Revenge of the Fallen? Recurrent Models Match Transformers at Predicting Human Language Comprehension Metricscited by 6
  10. 2024Large-scale cloze evaluation reveals that token prediction tasks are neither lexically nor semantically alignedcited by 5
  11. 2025The Inverse Scaling Effect of Pre-Trained Language Model Surprisal Is Not Due to Data Leakagecited by 5
  12. 2025Prompting from the bench: Large-scale pretraining is not sufficient to prepare LLMs for ordinary meaning analysiscited by 4
27 more
  1. 2025Sparse Brains are Also Adaptive Brains: Cognitive-Load-Aware Dynamic Activation for LLMscited by 3
  2. 2025Human-like fleeting memory improves language learning but impairs reading time prediction in transformer language modelscited by 3
  3. 2026Transformers perform adaptive partial poolingcited by 3
  4. 2026STARE: Surprisal-Guided Token-Level Advantage Reweighting for Policy Entropy Stabilitycited by 3
  5. 2026N-gram-like Language Models Predict Naturalistic Reading Time Bestcited by 2
  6. 2025Vectors from Larger Language Models Predict Human Reading Time and fMRI Data More Poorly when Dimensionality Expansion is Controlledcited by 1
  7. 2025Surprisal from Larger Transformer-based Language Models Predicts fMRI Data More Poorlycited by 1
  8. 2025LLMs Learn Constructions That Humans Do Not Knowcited by 1
  9. 2026Surprisal and Metaphor Novelty Judgments: Moderate Correlations and Divergent Scaling Effects Revealed by Corpus-Based and Synthetic Datasetscited by 1
  10. 2026Information-Theoretic Storage Cost in Sentence Comprehensioncited by 1
  11. 2026What Makes a Good Response? An Empirical Analysis of Quality in Qualitative Interviewscited by 1
  12. 2026The Frequency Confound in Language-Model Surprisal and Metaphor Noveltycited by 1
  13. 2026Smooth Scaling Laws Hide Stepwise Token Learningcited by 1
  14. 2024Black Big Boxes: Tracing Adjective Order Preferences in Large Language Modelscited by 0
  15. 2025Model Connectomes: A Generational Approach to Data-Efficient Language Modelscited by 0
  16. 2025Surprisal reveals diversity gaps in image captioning and different scorers change the storycited by 0
  17. 2026Spectral Archaeology: The Causal Topology of Model Evolutioncited by 0
  18. 2026On the scaling relationship between cloze probabilities and language model next-token predictioncited by 0
  19. 2026Adam's Law: Textual Frequency Law on Large Language Modelscited by 0
  20. 2026Encoding EEG Signals to Examine Human-Like Next-Word Prediction Behaviour in Language Modelscited by 0
  21. 2026Surprisal Theory is Tautological (without Rational Grounding)cited by 0
  22. 2026Causal Interventions Reveal Typologically Organized Syntactic Mechanisms in Multilingual Language Modelscited by 0
  23. 2026Do Cantonese-Adapted Language Models Better Predict Cantonese Reading? A Cross-Model Eye-Tracking Evaluationcited by 0
  24. 2026FreqBLiMP: Frequency-Controlled Minimal Pairs Reveal Robustness and Fragility of LLMs Under Lexical Raritycited by 0
  25. 2026Beetle: A Bilingual Model Suite for Modelling Second-Language Processingcited by 0
  26. 2026A Systematic Analysis of the Predictive Power of LM Surprisal in Reading Chinesecited by 0
  27. 2026Revisiting the Estimation of Unigram Surprisal in Computational Psycholinguisticscited by 0