mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Language models emulate certain cognitive profiles: An investigation of how predictability measures interact with individual differences

arXiv 2406.04988 ↗First posted 7 Jun 2024cs.CLcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

To date, most investigations on surprisal and entropy effects in reading have been conducted on the group level, disregarding individual differences. In this work, we revisit the predictive power of surprisal and entropy measures estimated from a range of language models (LMs) on data of human reading times as a measure of processing effort by incorporating information of language users' cognitive capacities. To do so, we assess the predictive power of surprisal and entropy estimated from generative LMs on reading data obtained from individuals who also completed a wide range of psychometric tests. Specifically, we investigate if modulating surprisal and entropy relative to cognitive scores increases prediction accuracy of reading times, and we examine whether LMs exhibit systematic biases in the prediction of reading times for cognitively high- or low-performing groups, revealing what type of psycholinguistic subject a given LM emulates. Our study finds that in most cases, incorporating cognitive capacities increases predictive power of surprisal and entropy on reading times, and that generally, high performance in the psychometric tests is associated with lower sensitivity to predictability effects. Finally, our results suggest that the analyzed LMs emulate readers with lower verbal intelligence, suggesting that for a given target group (i.e., individuals with high verbal intelligence), these LMs provide less accurate predictability estimates.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2024.

Builds on

12 of 52 references.

References · 12

  1. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  2. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
  3. 2019HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processingcited by 2,218
  4. 2020On the Predictive Power of Neural Language Models for Human Real-Time Comprehension Behaviorcited by 119
  5. 2022Why Does Surprisal From Larger Transformer-Based Language Models Provide a Poorer Fit to Human Reading Times?cited by 113
  6. 2020Fast WordPiece Tokenizationcited by 87
  7. 2023Testing the Predictions of Surprisal Theory in 11 Languagescited by 77
  8. 2021Revisiting the Uniform Information Density Hypothesiscited by 68
  9. 2021Lower Perplexity is Not Always Human-Likecited by 52
  10. 2023Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human Reading Times Best with About Two Billion Training Tokenscited by 41
  11. 2021A surprisal--duration trade-off across and within the world's languagescited by 23
  12. 2022On the Effect of Anticipation on Reading Timescited by 19

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

2 papers.