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
The paper investigates how language models avoid overgeneralizations by distinguishing between two types of indirect negative evidence: preemption and entrenchment. Through controlled rearing experiments on models trained on child‑caregiver conversations, the authors find that models do not exhibit verb‑specific preemption but show weak abstract preemption. Analysis of training dynamics suggests that competing structures act as indirect positive evidence rather than negative in the verb‑specific condition.
By Yixuan Wang, Freda Shi, Kanishka Misra
arXiv:2608. 04021v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Cloze-style probes that vary how often a target token appears implicitly assume that more copies of a target affect prediction the same way regardless of where the readout slot sits.
By Han-yu Wang
The study investigates whether large language models retain traces of abandoned syntactic analyses after encountering garden‑path sentences. Across 24 models ranging from 124 M to 70 B parameters, the authors find that a residue of the initial, incorrect analysis influences later object attachment, while an adaptation toward the resolved structure scales with disambiguation error. Activation‑patching experiments show that the residue is carried by noun‑phrase states computed under the object analysis, and that overriding these states largely removes the effect.
By Xiang Ding
arXiv:2610. 11765v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly ship with explicit "thinking modes", yet their counterpart, "no-thinking", has received far less attention.
By Dianqiao Lei, Kevin Qinghong Lin, Pan Lu, Philip Torr, James Zou
The paper studies how large language models (LLMs) handle the discourse particles "just" and "only" in natural conversation. Behavioral experiments show that both humans and LLMs prefer these particles and are more sensitive to "just" than "only", while instruction tuning enhances this sensitivity. Mechanistic analysis identifies specific units in the models that respond to each particle, revealing an asymmetric overlap in their internal representations.
By William Sheffield, Jiahui Chen, Amy Zhang, Alex Warstadt, Junyi Jessy Li, Kanishka Misra