Development of Cognitive Intelligence in Pre-trained Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent studies show evidence for emergent cognitive abilities in Large Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs). The increasing cognitive alignment of these models has made them candidates for cognitive science theories. Prior research into the emergent cognitive abilities of PLMs has largely been path-independent to model training, i.e., has focused on the final model weights and not the intermediate steps. However, building plausible models of human cognition using PLMs would benefit from considering the developmental alignment of their performance during training to the trajectories of children's thinking. Guided by psychometric tests of human intelligence, we choose four sets of tasks to investigate the alignment of ten popular families of PLMs and evaluate their available intermediate and final training steps. These tasks are Numerical ability, Linguistic abilities, Conceptual understanding, and Fluid reasoning. We find a striking regularity: regardless of model size, the developmental trajectories of PLMs consistently exhibit a window of maximal alignment to human cognitive development. Before that window, training appears to endow "blank slate" models with the requisite structure to be poised to rapidly learn from experience. After that window, training appears to serve the engineering goal of reducing loss but not the scientific goal of increasing alignment with human cognition.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 86 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jul 2024.
Builds on
25 of 86 references.
References · 25
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
- 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,346
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
- 2016The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse contextcited by 960
- 2019MathQA: Towards Interpretable Math Word Problem Solving with Operation-Based Formalismscited by 653
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 553
- 2024Large Language Models for Mathematical Reasoning: Progresses and Challengescited by 283
- 2023A Comprehensive Capability Analysis of GPT-3 and GPT-3.5 Series Modelscited by 244
- 2023In-Context Impersonation Reveals Large Language Models' Strengths and Biasescited by 154
- 2023How well do Large Language Models perform in Arithmetic tasks?cited by 130
13 more
- 2023Sudden Drops in the Loss: Syntax Acquisition, Phase Transitions, and Simplicity Bias in MLMscited by 121
- 2020Birds have four legs?! NumerSense: Probing Numerical Commonsense Knowledge of Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 110
- 2023LLM360: Towards Fully Transparent Open-Source LLMscited by 100
- 2022What Artificial Neural Networks Can Tell Us About Human Language Acquisitioncited by 97
- 2020Stratified Rule-Aware Network for Abstract Visual Reasoningcited by 72
- 2020Do Language Embeddings Capture Scales?cited by 63
- 2020Word meaning in minds and machinescited by 51
- 2023Language acquisition: do children and language models follow similar learning stages?cited by 40
- 2023Position: AI Evaluation Should Learn from How We Test Humanscited by 36
- 2021Do language models learn typicality judgments from text?cited by 32
- 2023Generative AI vs. AGI: The Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses of Modern LLMscited by 11
- 2023Comparing Machines and Children: Using Developmental Psychology Experiments to Assess the Strengths and Weaknesses of LaMDA Responsescited by 9
- 2024How Well Do Deep Learning Models Capture Human Concepts? The Case of the Typicality Effectcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.