The article argues that Surprisal Theory, often presented as a computational-level explanation, is not a theory in its own right. It contends that using large language model (LLM) surprisals without considering the underlying representational and algorithmic choices obscures the theory’s commitments. The authors demonstrate through three analyses that algorithm and architecture significantly influence language model probabilities, urging researchers to reassess treating LLM surprisals as interchangeable.
arXiv:2603.18007v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The study explores whether current Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities -- specifically, the ability to inf...
Surprisal theory holds that the human processing difficulty of a linguistic unit in context is an affine function of its surprisal under some language model. I argue this claim is a tautology without further constraint: for any non-negative difficulty measure over units in context, there exists a language model whose surprisal is an affine function of it under mild technical conditions.
arXiv:2607. 18570v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Discourse relations provide document structure, critical to language understanding and enabling language model performance and ethicality.
The study evaluates eleven autoregressive transformer models on English agreement attraction scenarios using a surprisal-based approach. Results show that while transformers match human reading times for prepositional phrase configurations, they perform poorly on object‑extracted relative clauses, with predictions diverging across models and failing to capture human interference patterns. The authors argue that current transformers cannot adequately model human morphosyntactic processing and call for more rigorous, comprehensive testing to avoid misleading conclusions from limited syntactic setups.
arXiv:2609.34187v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The strong version of the stochastic parrot argument claims that, although large language models (LLMs) may exceed rote regurgitation, they c...
arXiv:2603.29396v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Standard evaluations of Large language models (LLMs) focus on task performance, offering limited insight into whether correct behavior reflects app...
Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently exhibit sycophancy, where they agree with a user's statement even when incorrect. While sycophancy is often treated as a single defined behavior, it can manifest in substantially distinct ways and circumstances, raising the question of whether this multi-faceted nature is reflected in its internal mechanisms.
arXiv:2609.07943v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: There is significant uncertainty about whether abstractions like beliefs or desires usefully describe the behavior of large language models (LLMs). In...
arXiv:2607. 17948v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent-based models (ABMs) rely on simple, explicit and reproducible rules for individual decision making, while complex collective behavior emerges from interactions among agents.
arXiv:2604. 02512v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly exhibit human-like patterns of pragmatic and social reasoning.