arXiv Computation and Language

Syntactic Belief Update as the Driver of Garden Path Processing Difficulty

arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 31

Diverging Transformer Predictions for Human Sentence Processing: A Comprehensive Analysis of Agreement Attraction Effects

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.

By Titus von der Malsburg, Sebastian Pad\'o
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 23

Surprisal Theory is Tautological (without Rational Grounding)

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 Machine Learning
Jun 25

Weave of Formal Thought

arXiv:2606. 25987v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) attain remarkable surface fluency on code, yet they neither formally guarantee the syntactic validity of their output nor leverage the hierarchical structure defining the target language.

By Alexandre Bouayad
arXiv AI
Sep 2

Energy-Based Transformers as Predictors of Reading Difficulty

The paper investigates energy-based transformers as predictors of reading difficulty, extending the use of transformer language models in psycholinguistics. It demonstrates that the energy measure from these models robustly predicts reading times across multiple corpora, outperforming traditional metrics like surprisal and attention entropy. In a controlled experiment on relative clause processing, energy captures known asymmetries, suggesting it may unify previously complementary predictors.

By Jakub Dotlacil, Ece Takmaz
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 4

Breaking the Likelihood Trap: Variance-Calibrated Modulation for Large Language Model Decoding

The paper introduces Variance‑Calibrated Modulation (VCM), a training‑free pre‑decoding technique that reshapes language model probability distributions before truncation. VCM uses two dynamic mechanisms: a Contextual Searchlight via PMI to suppress stopwords and highlight context‑relevant tokens, and an Adaptive Self‑Debiasing that applies scale‑invariant penalization based on real‑time logit standard deviation. Experiments on open‑ended generation, factual QA, and mathematical reasoning show that VCM consistently reduces the likelihood trap, improving diversity, coherence, and reasoning accuracy with minimal computational cost.

By Yuanhao Ding, Meimingwei Li, Esteban Garces Arias, Matthias A{\ss}enmacher, Christian Heumann, Chongsheng Zhang
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 22

The Origins of Stochasticity: Comprehensive Investigations on Uncertainty Quantification for Large Language Models

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled sophisticated reasoning and content generation, yet their inherent stochasticity poses significant challenges for ensuring predictive credibility. While traditional uncertainty taxonomy paradigms, such as the dichotomy of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, provide conceptual foundations, they often fail to capture the multi-component and multi-stage nature of LLM generation and struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of various Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) methods.

arXiv AI
Jul 23

Rethinking Uncertainty Evaluation in Large Language Models

arXiv:2607. 19367v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Calibration is the primary criterion for evaluating LLM confidence, but it is insufficient: it admits trivially incoherent estimators, depends on the evaluation distribution, and does not test the extent to which the estimation can be interpreted as a consistent, underlying probability function.

By Krish Matta, Atharv Naphade, Andy Zou
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 27

The Imperfective Paradox Is Not Necessarily in Large Language Models: A Benchmark Failure Before a Model Failure

The paper critiques a recent NLI benchmark that tests the imperfective paradox, arguing that the benchmark suffers from conceptual and evaluation mis-specifications, notably Aspectual Reduction and a lack of strict NLI standards. The authors re-evaluate the benchmark, identify mis-specifications, and construct lexically matched minimal pairs to control for lexical variation. Their experiments reveal that models often exhibit a Sufficiency Bias, accept simple‑past hypotheses without affirming culmination, and that prompting interventions shift label decisions without improving true semantic understanding, highlighting additional failure modes such as compositional aspectual classification errors and surface‑form attraction.

By Kaiqiao Han, Yizhou Sun
arXiv AI
3d ago

FreqBLiMP: Frequency-Controlled Minimal Pairs Reveal Robustness and Fragility of LLMs Under Lexical Rarity

FreqBLiMP is a frequency‑controlled extension of the BLiMP minimal‑pair benchmark that regenerates all 67 paradigms under explicit Zipf‑frequency regimes while preserving grammatical contrasts. The study evaluates multiple open‑weight LLM families and finds that lower lexical frequency consistently reduces sentence likelihood, yet overall contrastive acceptability accuracy drops only modestly. However, the stability in aggregate accuracy hides significant variability across linguistic phenomena, with models remaining robust on overt morphosyntactic generalization but degrading on lemma‑specific tasks.

By Tyrone White, Yuki Arase