Articulation Upper Bounds for Language Models
Language captures only a subset of the perceptions, intuitions and intents that form meaning between speakers. What, then, are the limits of language? We take steps towards measuring this in LLMs as f...
Language captures only a subset of the perceptions, intuitions and intents that form meaning between speakers. What, then, are the limits of language? We take steps towards measuring this in LLMs as f...
The paper investigates how the way users phrase advice‑seeking requests—termed articulation—creates stable, measurable patterns distinct from the topics of the requests. By analyzing 16,447 prompts from public chat corpora, the authors identify a small set of latent articulation factors that consistently appear across datasets and splits. One key finding is a long‑form, information‑poor style that leads language models to give shorter, vaguer answers without seeking clarification, a pattern that persists across topics and prompt lengths.
arXiv:2609.07474v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Language models compute over tokens: language is their input, their output, and increasingly their internal representation. Whether language should...
The paper argues that language operates with two parameters: amplitude, which measures how often words co‑occur, and phase, a signed relational factor that determines how co‑activated meanings combine and can reverse a meaning’s contribution. Unlike amplitude, phase is not captured by standard word embeddings or transformer attention weights and is indexed to individuals and dyadic interactions. The authors propose six empirical predictions to test phase’s role and suggest that future language models should incorporate agent‑indexed, phase‑bearing semantic states.
arXiv:2604. 02512v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly exhibit human-like patterns of pragmatic and social reasoning.
arXiv:2610.03551v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have reached expert-level performance on competition mathematics largely through the volume of search placed around them:...
arXiv:2603. 20381v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Understanding the fundamental mechanisms governing the production of meaning in the processing of natural language is critical for designing safe, thoughtful, engaging, and empowering human-agent interactions.
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...
arXiv:2606. 08076v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate high-quality arguments, yet their ability to engage in nuanced and persuasive communicative actions remains largely unexplored.
arXiv:2608.21088v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mufwene's ecological model locates language evolution in competition among variants contributed by individual idiolects and in speakers' selection from...
arXiv:2610.18727v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Natural Language Autoencoders (NLAs) are proposed as oversight tools for language models: an Activation Verbaliser (AV) writes an English explanati...
The article examines chatbots as partners in problem‑solving conversations, arguing that basic chatbots—comprising a large language model (LLM) and a simple interface—are multifaceted but cannot match human cognitive flexibility. Drawing on Aggregation Dynamics, Cognitive Linguistics, Neuropsychology, and Psychology, the authors describe how LLMs encode artificial metaphorical problem propagations from training data, which only partially imitate human thinking. They conclude that further LLM development will not yield true thinking partners, yet chatbots are widely used, making their understanding socially and politically important.