CxMP: A Linguistic Minimal-Pair Benchmark for Evaluating Constructional Understanding in Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent work has examined language models from a linguistic perspective to better understand how they acquire language. Most existing benchmarks focus on judging grammatical acceptability, whereas the ability to interpret meanings conveyed by grammatical forms has received much less attention. We introduce the Linguistic Minimal-Pair Benchmark for Evaluating Constructional Understanding in Language Models (CxMP), a benchmark grounded in Construction Grammar that treats form-meaning pairings, or constructions, as fundamental linguistic units. CxMP evaluates whether models can interpret the semantic relations implied by constructions, using a controlled minimal-pair design across nine construction types, including the let-alone, caused motion, and ditransitive constructions. Our results show that while syntactic competence emerges early, constructional understanding develops more gradually and remains limited even in large language models (LLMs). CxMP thus reveals persistent gaps in how language models integrate form and meaning, providing a framework for studying constructional understanding and learning trajectories in language models.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Feb 2026.
Builds on
21 of 48 references.
References · 21
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,837
- 2018Neural Network Acceptability Judgmentscited by 952
- 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 864
- 2018Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Datacited by 656
- 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 553
- 2024Language Models Learn Rare Phenomena from Less Rare Phenomena: The Case of the Missing AANNscited by 65
- 2024Elements of World Knowledge (EWoK): A Cognition-Inspired Framework for Evaluating Basic World Knowledge in Language Modelscited by 55
- 2025How Linguistics Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Language Modelscited by 50
- 2024Findings of the Second BabyLM Challenge: Sample-Efficient Pretraining on Developmentally Plausible Corporacited by 48
- 2022The Better Your Syntax, the Better Your Semantics? Probing Pretrained Language Models for the English Comparative Correlativecited by 35
- 2024GPT or BERT: why not both?cited by 26
9 more
- 2025BabyLM Turns 3: Call for papers for the 2025 BabyLM workshopcited by 24
- 2024How to Make the Most of LLMs' Grammatical Knowledge for Acceptability Judgmentscited by 14
- 2025Developmentally-plausible Working Memory Shapes a Critical Period for Language Acquisitioncited by 10
- 2025Linguistic Generalizations are not Rules: Impacts on Evaluation of LMscited by 10
- 2024AntLM: Bridging Causal and Masked Language Modelscited by 8
- 2025Open-sci-ref-0.01: open and reproducible reference baselines for language model and dataset comparisoncited by 6
- 2025Beyond Memorization: Assessing Semantic Generalization in Large Language Models Using Phrasal Constructionscited by 5
- 2025Unpacking Let Alone: Human-Scale Models Generalize to a Rare Construction in Form but not Meaningcited by 4
- 2025Evaluating CxG Generalisation in LLMs via Construction-Based NLI Fine Tuningcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.