← Back to all news
arXiv Computation and Language By Claire Bonial, Claire Benet Post, Laura Michaelis, Harish Tayyar Madabushi

Linguistic Productivity in Large Language Models: Models Coerce, but do not Preempt

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) handle two usage‑based grammatical strategies: coercion, where a mismatched word is reinterpreted to fit its context, and preemption, where a plausible structure is avoided because it never appears in expected contexts. Experiments across models of varying sizes show that larger LLMs successfully recognize and produce constructional productivity in coercive situations, even with novel words, but they fail to exhibit preemptive behavior, lacking the negative evidence that would guide avoidance of unconventional but semantically viable constructions. The authors argue that coercion is detectable due to its surprising, semantically motivated nature, whereas preemption lacks such a signature, leading to an asymmetry where models coerce but do not preempt.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

Related stories

arXiv AI
5d ago

Behavioral Couplings: From Formation to Behavioral Emergence in Language Models

The paper introduces the concept of behavioral couplings, where fine‑tuning a large language model on one behavior can unintentionally trigger another related behavior. By training on documents that pair distinct behaviors, the authors show that fine‑tuning to elicit one behavior causes the other to emerge, and that couplings can compose across multiple document sets. These findings highlight that unintended behaviors can surface after fine‑tuning and may be difficult to trace back to their origins.

By Dongyoon Hahm, Woogyeol Jin, Dennis Wei, Yi Zhou, Nathalie Baracaldo, Kimin Lee
llmsfine-tuning
More like this →
arXiv Computation and Language
1d ago

Verbalizing Activation Differences with Natural Language Autoencoders

The paper investigates natural language autoencoders (NLAs) as tools for verbalizing activation differences in large language models. It examines whether NLAs capture compositional structure, generalize to fine‑tuned models, recover fine‑tuning objectives, and can be specialized for model diffing. Experiments across four models show that NLAs largely succeed in these tasks, though they do not yet match state‑of‑the‑art diffing methods on emergent misalignment detection.

By Andrea Blasi N\'u\~nez, Gianluca Barmina, Federico Torrielli, Thiusius Rajeeth Savarimuthu, Peter Schneider-Kamp, Lukas Galke Poech
llmsreinforcement-learningfine-tuningbenchmarks
More like this →
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 3

Disentangling Statistical Preemption from Entrenchment in Language Models' Avoidance of Overgeneralization

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
llms
More like this →