Singapore

Language models (LMs) have been argued to overlap substantially with human beings in grammaticality judgment tasks. But when humans systematically make errors in language processing, should we expect LMs to behave like cognitive models of language and mimic human behavior? We answer this question by
investigating LMs&#39; more subtle judgments associated with &quot;language illusions&quot; – sentences that are vague in meaning, implausible, or ungrammatical but receive unexpectedly high acceptability judgments by humans. We looked at three illusions: the comparative illusion (e.g. &quot;More people have been to Russia than I have&quot;), the depth-charge illusion (e.g. &quot;No head injury is too trivial to be ignored&quot;), and the negative
polarity item (NPI) illusion (e.g. &quot;The hunter who no villager believed to be trustworthy will ever shoot a bear&quot;). We found that probabilities represented by LMs were more likely to align with human judgments of being &quot;tricked&quot; by the NPI illusion which examines a structural dependency, compared to the comparative and the depth-charge illusions which require sophisticated semantic understanding. No single LM or metric yielded results that are entirely consistent with human behavior. Ultimately, we show that LMs are limited both in their construal as cognitive models of human language processing and in their capacity to recognize nuanced but critical information in complicated language materials.

EMNLP 2023

Can Language Models Be Tricked by Language Illusions? Easier with Syntax, Harder with Semantics

llms as cognitive models of language processing

language illusion

evaluation of llms

computational psycholinguistics

**Welcome to EMNLP 2023!**

On behalf of the EMNLP 2023 Organizing Committee, I extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to all of you to the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). It is with immense pleasure and excitement that we gather here in Singapore, a vibrant hub of innovation and technological advancement.

The conference program is packed with insightful presentations, thought-provoking workshops, and engaging networking opportunities. In addition to the technical sessions, we have also planned several social events that will provide you with the opportunity to connect with your colleagues.

The conference is held in person at the Resorts World Convention Centre in Singapore, and available on-line with the help of Underline.

For those in Singapore, I hope that you will find time to explore the exciting Sentosa Island, Gardens by the Bay, Singapore Botanic Gardens and the many other attractions unique to Singapore.

Of course, we are grateful to our sponsors and partners for their generous support of EMNLP 2023, whose contributions make it possible for us to host this world-class event.

Yuji Matsumoto (RIKEN AIP) 
EMNLP 2023 General Chair

To access the **EMNLP 2023** event page on Underline, you need to register for the Conference. 
Please follow **[this link](https://2023.emnlp.org/registration/)** for more details.

EMNLP 2023 took place in Singapore from Dec 6th to Dec 10th, 2023.

Language models (LMs) have been argued to overlap substantially with human beings in grammaticality judgment tasks. But when humans systematically make errors in language processing, should we expect LMs to behave like cognitive models of language and mimic human behavior? We answer this question by
investigating LMs' more subtle judgments associated with "language illusions" – sentences that are vague in meaning, implausible, or ungrammatical but receive unexpectedly high acceptability judgments by humans. We looked at three illusions: the comparative illusion (e.g. "More people have been to Russia than I have"), the depth-charge illusion (e.g. "No head injury is too trivial to be ignored"), and the negative
polarity item (NPI) illusion (e.g. "The hunter who no villager believed to be trustworthy will ever shoot a bear"). We found that probabilities represented by LMs were more likely to align with human judgments of being "tricked" by the NPI illusion which examines a structural dependency, compared to the comparative and the depth-charge illusions which require sophisticated semantic understanding. No single LM or metric yielded results that are entirely consistent with human behavior. Ultimately, we show that LMs are limited both in their construal as cognitive models of human language processing and in their capacity to recognize nuanced but critical information in complicated language materials.

workshop paper

We conjecture that hidden state vectors corresponding to individual input tokens encode information sufficient to accurately predict several tokens ahead. More concretely, in this paper we ask: Given a hidden (internal) representation of a single token at position t in an input, can we reliably anticipate the tokens that will appear at positions ≥ t + 2? To test this, we measure linear approximation and causal intervention methods in GPT-J-6B to evaluate the degree to which individual hidden states in the network contain signal rich enough to predict future hidden states and, ultimately, token outputs. We find that, at some layers, we can approximate a model's output with more than 48% accuracy with respect to its prediction of subsequent tokens through a single hidden state. Finally we present a "Future Lens" visualization that uses these methods to create a new view of transformer states.

Future Lens: Anticipating Subsequent Tokens from a Single Hidden State

Building multi-modal language models has been a trend in the recent years, where additional modalities such as image, video, speech, etc. are jointly learned along with natural languages (i.e., textual information). Despite the success of these multi-modal language models with different modalities, there is no existing solution for neural network architectures and natural languages. Providing neural architectural information as a new modality allows us to provide fast architecture-2-text and text-2-architecture retrieval/generation services on the cloud with a single inference. Such solution is valuable in terms of helping beginner and intermediate ML users to come up with better neural architectures or AutoML approaches with a simple text query. In this paper, we propose ArchBERT, a bi-modal model for joint learning and understanding of neural architectures and natural languages, which opens up new avenues for research in this area. We also introduce a pre-training strategy named Masked Architecture Modeling (MAM) for a more generalized joint learning. Moreover, we introduce and publicly release two new bi-modal datasets for training and validating our methods. The ArchBERT's performance is verified through a set of numerical experiments on different downstream tasks such as architecture-oriented reasoning, question answering, and captioning (summarization). Datasets, codes, and demos are available as supplementary materials.

ArchBERT: Bi-Modal Understanding of Neural Architectures and Natural Languages

Different speakers often produce different names for the same object or entity (e.g., "woman'' vs. "tourist'' for a female tourist). The reasons behind variation in naming are not well understood. We create a Language and Vision dataset for Mandarin Chinese that provides an average of 20 names for 1319 naturalistic images, and investigate how familiarity with a given kind of object relates to the degree of naming variation it triggers across subjects. We propose that familiarity influences naming variation in two competing ways: increasing familiarity can either expand vocabulary, leading to higher variation, or promote convergence on conventional names, thereby reducing variation. We find evidence for both factors being at play. Our study illustrates how computational resources can be used to address research questions in Cognitive Science.

The Impact of Familiarity on Naming Variation: A Study on Object Naming in Mandarin Chinese

There is growing interest in incorporating eye-tracking data and other implicit measures of human language processing into natural language processing (NLP) pipelines. The data from human language processing contain unique insight into human linguistic understanding that could be exploited by language models. However, many unanswered questions remain about the nature of this data and how it can best be utilized in downstream NLP tasks. In this paper, we present EyeStyliency, an eye-tracking dataset for human processing of stylistic text (e.g., politeness). We develop an experimental protocol to collect these style-specific eye movements. We further investigate how this saliency data compares to both human annotation methods and model-based interpretability metrics. We find that while eye-tracking data is unique, it also intersects with both human annotations and model-based importance scores, providing a possible bridge between human- and machine-based perspectives. We propose utilizing this type of data to evaluate the cognitive plausibility of models that interpret style. Our eye-tracking data and processing code are publicly available.

A Comparative Study on Textual Saliency of Styles from Eye Tracking, Annotations, and Language Models

Human languages are often claimed to fundamentally differ from other communication systems. But what is it exactly that unites them as a separate category? This article proposes to approach this problem – here termed the Zipfian Challenge – as a standard classification task. A corpus with textual material from diverse writing systems and languages, as well as other symbolic and non-symbolic systems, is provided. These are subsequently used to train and test binary classification algorithms, assigning labels "writing" and "non-writing" to character strings of the test sets. The performance is generally high, reaching 98% accuracy for the best algorithms. Human languages emerge to have a statistical fingerprint: large unit inventories, high entropy, and few repetitions of adjacent units. This fingerprint can be used to tease them apart from other symbolic and non-symbolic systems.

The Zipfian Challenge: Learning the statistical fingerprint of natural languages

This paper explores utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs) to perform Cross-Document Event Coreference Resolution (CDEC) annotations and evaluates how they fare against human annotators with different levels of training. Specifically, we formulate CDEC as a multi-category classification problem on pairs of events that are represented as decontextualized sentences, and compare the predictions of GPT-4 with the judgment of fully trained annotators and crowdworkers on the same data set. Our study indicates that GPT-4 with zero-shot learning outperformed crowd-workers by a large margin and exhibits a level of performance comparable to trained annotators. Upon closer analysis, GPT-4 also exhibits tendencies of being overly confident, and force annotation decisions even when such decisions are not warranted due to insufficient information. Our results have implications on how to perform complicated annotations such as CDEC in the age of LLMs, and show that the best way to acquire such annotations might be to combine the strengths of LLMs and trained human annotators in the annotation process, and using untrained or undertrained crowdworkers is no longer a viable option to acquire high-quality data to advance the state of the art for such problems.

Cross-Document Event Coreference Resolution: Instruct Humans or Instruct GPT?

Edge probing tests are classification tasks that test for grammatical knowledge encoded in token representations coming from contextual encoders such as large language models (LLMs). Many LLM encoders have shown high performance in EP tests, leading to conjectures about their ability to encode linguistic knowledge. However, a large body of research claims that the tests necessarily do not measure the LLM's capacity to encode knowledge, but rather reflect the classifiers' ability to learn the problem. Much of this criticism stems from the fact that often the classifiers have very similar accuracy when an LLM vs a random encoder is used. Consequently, several modifications to the tests have been suggested, including information theoretic probes. We show that commonly used edge probing test datasets have various biases including memorization. When these biases are removed, the LLM encoders do show a significant difference from the random ones, even with the simple non-information theoretic probes.

Implications of Annotation Artifacts in Edge Probing Test Datasets

In this resource paper we release ChiSCor, a new corpus containing 619 fantasy stories, told freely by 442 Dutch children aged 4-12. ChiSCor was compiled for studying how children render character perspectives, and unravelling language and cognition in development, with computational tools. Unlike existing resources, ChiSCor's stories were produced in natural contexts, in line with recent calls for more ecologically valid datasets. ChiSCor hosts text, audio, and annotations for character complexity and linguistic complexity. Additional metadata (e.g. education of caregivers) is available for one third of the Dutch children. ChiSCor also includes a small set of 62 English stories. This paper details how ChiSCor was compiled and shows its potential for future work with three brief case studies: i) we show that the syntactic complexity of stories is strikingly stable across children's ages; ii) we extend work on Zipfian distributions in free speech and show that ChiSCor obeys Zipf's law closely, reflecting its social context; iii) we show that even though ChiSCor is relatively small, the corpus is rich enough to train informative lemma vectors that allow us to analyse children's language use. We end with a reflection on the value of narrative datasets in computational linguistics.

ChiSCor: A Corpus of Freely-Told Fantasy Stories by Dutch Children for Computational Linguistics and Cognitive Science

Human-annotated textual explanations are becoming increasingly important in Explainable Natural Language Processing. Rationale extraction aims to provide faithful (i.e. reflective of the behavior of the model) and plausible (i.e. convincing to humans) explanations by highlighting the inputs that had the largest impact on the prediction without compromising the performance of the task model. In recent works, the focus of training rationale extractors was primarily on optimizing for plausibility using human highlights, while the task model was trained on jointly optimizing for task predictive accuracy and faithfulness. We propose REFER, a framework that employs a differentiable rationale extractor that allows to back-propagate through the rationale extraction process. We analyze the impact of using human highlights during training by jointly training the task model and the rationale extractor. In our experiments, REFER yields significantly better results in terms of faithfulness, plausibility, and downstream task accuracy on both in-distribution and out-of-distribution data. On both e-SNLI and CoS-E, our best setting produces better results in terms of composite normalized relative gain than the previous baselines by 11% and 3%, respectively.

REFER: An End-to-end Rationale Extraction Framework for Explanation Regularization

Language models are often used as the backbone of modern dialogue systems. These models are pre-trained on large amounts of written fluent language. Repetition is typically penalised when evaluating language model generations. However, it is a key component of dialogue. Humans use local and partner specific repetitions; these are preferred by human users and lead to more successful communication in dialogue. In this study, we evaluate (a) whether language models produce human-like levels of repetition in dialogue, and (b) what are the processing mechanisms related to lexical re-use they use during comprehension. We believe that such joint analysis of model production and comprehension behaviour can inform the development of cognitively inspired dialogue generation systems.

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2023

Future Lens: Anticipating Subsequent Tokens from a Single Hidden State

Similar lecture

Grounding Visual Illusions in Language: Do Vision-Language Models Perceive Illusions Like Humans?

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2023

Future Lens: Anticipating Subsequent Tokens from a Single Hidden State

Similar lecture

Grounding Visual Illusions in Language: Do Vision-Language Models Perceive Illusions Like Humans?

Downloads