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
arXiv:2601. 04098v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Transformer language models systematically prefer tokens at specific input positions regardless of semantic relevance---a phenomenon known as positional bias.
By Maryam Rahimi, Mahdi Nouri, Yadollah Yaghoobzadeh
arXiv:2601.19926v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: We present a systematic review of 337 articles evaluating the syntactic abilities of Transformer-based language models (TLMs), reporting on o...
By Nora Graichen, Iria de-Dios-Flores, Gemma Boleda
arXiv:2608. 06111v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Positional embeddings (PE) in Transformers encode token distance and order but are largely agnostic to \textit{syntactic structure}.
By Haris Riaz, Hyungji Kim, Mihai Surdeanu
The study compares an English-only and a bilingual decoder-only model, each 310 M parameters, trained on eight diverse languages while controlling for English exposure, compute, and document overlap. After aligning on shared English vocabulary, the authors find that token embeddings appear similar, but the deeper hidden states used for prediction diverge across models. This hidden‑state mismatch grows through middle transformer layers and persists despite controls, indicating that contextual processing differs between the models.
"whyItMatters":"The findings show that embedding alignment can conceal significant internal representation differences, which is crucial for any downstream work that assumes aligned multilingual models are interchangeable."
By Anjishnu Mukherjee, Ziwei Zhu, Antonios Anastasopoulos
The paper studies how transformer representations evolve across layers by examining the intrinsic dimensionality (ID) of token embeddings and their neighborhood structures. It finds that closed‑class tokens expand and collapse earlier than open‑class tokens, and that these changes are linked to shifts in local geometry. The authors compare encoder and decoder models, showing distinct layer‑wise behaviors, and demonstrate that geometric features alone can predict a token’s part‑of‑speech and reveal how semantic content changes across layers.
By Samuele Vallisa, Federico Ravenda, Claudio Palominos, Rui He, Andrea Raballo, Antonietta Mira, Philipp Homan, Wolfram Hinzen
arXiv:2609.07876v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Recent methods in language model interpretability employ techniques such as sparse autoencoders to decompose residual stream contributions into linea...
By Arjun Patrawala, Jiahai Feng, Erik Jones, Jacob Steinhardt
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:2606. 01060v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Preference alignment has substantially improved the observable behavior of large language models, yet it remains unclear what alignment changes internally.
By Partha Pratim Saha, Samarth Raina, Mayur Parvatikar, Amit Dhanda, Vinija Jain, Aman Chadha, Amitava Das
arXiv:2608. 10137v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Grammar Constrained Decoding (GCD) forces Language Models (LMs) to produce syntactically valid outputs by masking out non-conforming tokens at each step.
By I\c{s}{\i}l \"Ozg\"u, Yaoxuan Wu, Guy Van den Broeck, Miryung Kim
The paper studies structural priming in language model production by conducting controlled sentence‑completion experiments on dative constructions. Results show that language models exhibit priming effects, especially when sentences are semantically coherent, with stronger relative increases for double‑object datives and larger absolute increases for prepositional‑object datives. The study also finds that primed completions involve more lexico‑semantic repetition, indicating that priming operates across syntactic, lexical, and semantic levels.
By Giulia Pucci, Ruizhe Li, Arabella Sinclair
arXiv:2606. 05486v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Prompt ambiguity is a common source of failure in large language models, but is difficult to localize because it is a latent property of the prompt, while existing attribution methods are designed to explain observable outputs such as logits or generated tokens.
By Govind Ramesh, Yao Dou, Wei Xu