The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
The study introduces a latent‑process multinomial processing tree (MPT) model to analyze human reading and comprehension of garden‑path sentences across four reading paradigms (eye tracking, uni‑ and bidirectional self‑paced reading, Maze). The model separates the likelihood of an incorrect initial analysis, the cost of encountering an incompatible continuation, and the cost of syntactic reanalysis, yielding more realistic parameter estimates when inattentive trials are considered. Cross‑validation shows that this MPT model predicts human reading patterns and end‑of‑trial judgments better than a model relying solely on large‑language‑model (LLM) surprisal, and that incorporating surprisal as an additional predictor further improves fit.
arXiv:2509.15114v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: A controversial test for Large Language Models concerns the ability to discern possible from impossible language. While some evidence attests to th...
The paper investigates how adjectival modifiers affect the semantic plausibility of events, using the Adept benchmark of 16,000 English sentence pairs that differ by a single adjective. Experiments show that sentence transformers, despite being conceptually suited to the task, underperform compared to models like RoBERTa. The authors provide an error analysis and discuss the implications of their findings for future work on balancing training and test data.
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.
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.
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.