A Distributional Perspective on Word Learning in Neural Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Language models (LMs) are increasingly being studied as models of human language learners. Due to the nascency of the field, it is not well-established whether LMs exhibit similar learning dynamics to humans, and there are few direct comparisons between learning trajectories in humans and models. Word learning trajectories for children are relatively well-documented, and recent work has tried to extend these investigations to language models. However, there are no widely agreed-upon metrics for word learning in language models. We take a distributional approach to this problem, defining lexical knowledge in terms of properties of the learned distribution for a target word. We argue that distributional signatures studied in prior work fail to capture key distributional information. Thus, we propose an array of signatures that improve on earlier approaches by capturing knowledge of both where the target word can and cannot occur as well as gradient preferences about the word's appropriateness. We obtain learning trajectories for a selection of small language models we train from scratch, study the relationship between different distributional signatures, compare how well they align with human word learning trajectories and interpretable lexical features, and address basic methodological questions about estimating these distributional signatures. Our metrics largely capture complementary information, suggesting that it is important not to rely on a single metric. However, across all metrics, language models' learning trajectories fail to correlate with those of children.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2025.
Builds on
21 of 61 references.
References · 21
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2013Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionalitycited by 3,462
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 553
- 2018Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 239
- 2014SimLex-999: Evaluating Semantic Models with (Genuine) Similarity Estimationcited by 170
- 2022What Artificial Neural Networks Can Tell Us About Human Language Acquisitioncited by 97
- 2016Cognitive Science in the era of Artificial Intelligence: A roadmap for reverse-engineering the infant language-learnercited by 68
- 2020Multi-agent Communication meets Natural Language: Synergies between Functional and Structural Language Learningcited by 65
- 2018A standardized Project Gutenberg corpus for statistical analysis of natural language and quantitative linguisticscited by 64
- 2013Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysiscited by 63
- 2016SimVerb-3500: A Large-Scale Evaluation Set of Verb Similaritycited by 44
- 2023Language acquisition: do children and language models follow similar learning stages?cited by 40
9 more
- 2023Characterizing Learning Curves During Language Model Pre-Training: Learning, Forgetting, and Stabilitycited by 34
- 2024[Call for Papers] The 2nd BabyLM Challenge: Sample-efficient pretraining on a developmentally plausible corpuscited by 26
- 2024On the Role of Context in Reading Time Predictioncited by 17
- 2023Visual Grounding Helps Learn Word Meanings in Low-Data Regimescited by 16
- 2024Babysit A Language Model From Scratch: Interactive Language Learning by Trials and Demonstrationscited by 12
- 2017Accumulated Gradient Normalizationcited by 10
- 2023Learning the meanings of function words from grounded language using a visual question answering modelcited by 6
- 2024Lexicon-Level Contrastive Visual-Grounding Improves Language Modelingcited by 6
- 2022A Computational Acquisition Model for Multimodal Word Categorizationcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
4 papers.
- 2025A Review of Incorporating Psychological Theories in LLMscited by 5
- 2025Towards Developmentally Plausible Rewards: Communicative Success as a Learning Signal for Interactive Language Modelscited by 4
- 2026Child-directed speech facilitates production, not comprehension, in BabyLMscited by 0
- 2026On the use of foundation models in cognitive sciencecited by 0
- 2026On the use of foundation models in cognitive science7 Aug 2026
- 2026Child-directed speech facilitates production, not comprehension, in BabyLMs31 May 2026
- 2025Towards Developmentally Plausible Rewards: Communicative Success as a Learning Signal for Interactive Language Models9 May 2025
- 2025A Review of Incorporating Psychological Theories in LLMs28 Mar 2025