mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Incremental Comprehension of Garden-Path Sentences by Large Language Models: Semantic Interpretation, Syntactic Re-Analysis, and Attention

arXiv 2405.16042 ↗First posted 25 May 2024cs.CLcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

When reading temporarily ambiguous garden-path sentences, misinterpretations sometimes linger past the point of disambiguation. This phenomenon has traditionally been studied in psycholinguistic experiments using online measures such as reading times and offline measures such as comprehension questions. Here, we investigate the processing of garden-path sentences and the fate of lingering misinterpretations using four large language models (LLMs): GPT-2, LLaMA-2, Flan-T5, and RoBERTa. The overall goal is to evaluate whether humans and LLMs are aligned in their processing of garden-path sentences and in the lingering misinterpretations past the point of disambiguation, especially when extra-syntactic information (e.g., a comma delimiting a clause boundary) is present to guide processing. We address this goal using 24 garden-path sentences that have optional transitive and reflexive verbs leading to temporary ambiguities. For each sentence, there are a pair of comprehension questions corresponding to the misinterpretation and the correct interpretation. In three experiments, we (1) measure the dynamic semantic interpretations of LLMs using the question-answering task; (2) track whether these models shift their implicit parse tree at the point of disambiguation (or by the end of the sentence); and (3) visualize the model components that attend to disambiguating information when processing the question probes. These experiments show promising alignment between humans and LLMs in the processing of garden-path sentences, especially when extra-syntactic information is available to guide processing.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 May 2024.

Builds on

21 of 34 references.

References · 21

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  5. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  6. 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 2,997
  7. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
  8. 2022Emergent Abilities of Large Language Modelscited by 2,483
  9. 2019What Does BERT Look At? An Analysis of BERT's Attentioncited by 994
  10. 2019A Multiscale Visualization of Attention in the Transformer Modelcited by 292
  11. 2023A Comprehensive Capability Analysis of GPT-3 and GPT-3.5 Series Modelscited by 244
  12. 2018Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 239
9 more
  1. 2023We're Afraid Language Models Aren't Modeling Ambiguitycited by 124
  2. 2020On the Predictive Power of Neural Language Models for Human Real-Time Comprehension Behaviorcited by 115
  3. 2021A Targeted Assessment of Incremental Processing in Neural LanguageModels and Humanscited by 32
  4. 2024Mission: Impossible Language Modelscited by 31
  5. 2023Human Behavioral Benchmarking: Numeric Magnitude Comparison Effects in Large Language Modelscited by 10
  6. 2023Toward best research practices in AI Psychologycited by 8
  7. 2019What Syntactic Structures block Dependencies in RNN Language Models?cited by 5
  8. 2023Pre-training LLMs using human-like development data corpuscited by 5
  9. 2022Garden-Path Traversal in GPT-2cited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 6.

10 papers.