Surprisal theory has provided a unifying framework for understanding many phenomena in sentence processing (Hale, 2001; Levy, 2008a), positing that a word's conditional probability given all prior context fully determines processing difficulty. Problematically for this claim, one local statistic, word frequency, has also been shown to affect processing, even when conditional probability given context is held constant. Here, we ask whether other local statistics have a role in processing, or whether word frequency is a special case. We present the first clear evidence that more complex local statistics, word bigram and trigram probability, also affect processing independently of surprisal. These findings suggest a significant and independent role of local statistics in processing. Further, it motivates research into new generalizations of surprisal that can also explain why local statistical information should have an outsized effect.
Human reading behavior is sensitive to surprisal: more predictable words tend to be read faster. Unexpectedly, this applies not only to the surprisal of the word that is currently being read, but also to the surprisal of upcoming (successor) words that have not been fixated yet. This finding has been interpreted as evidence that readers can extract lexical information parafoveally. Calling this interpretation into question, Angele et al. (2015) showed that successor effects appear even in contexts in which those successor words are not yet visible. They hypothesized that successor surprisal pr…
This work presents a detailed linguistic analysis into why larger Transformer-based pre-trained language models with more parameters and lower perplexity nonetheless yield surprisal estimates that are less predictive of human reading times. First, regression analyses show a strictly monotonic, positive log-linear relationship between perplexity and fit to reading times for the more recently released five GPT-Neo variants and eight OPT variants on two separate datasets, replicating earlier results limited to just GPT-2 (Oh et al., 2022). Subsequently, analysis of residual errors reveals a syste…
Stanford University（斯坦福大学）；University of Edinburgh（爱丁堡大学）；University of Washington（华盛顿大学）；Harvard University（哈佛大学）
Intuitively, human readers cope easily with errors in text; typos, misspelling, word substitutions, etc. do not unduly disrupt natural reading. Previous work indicates that letter transpositions result in increased reading times, but it is unclear if this effect generalizes to more natural errors. In this paper, we report an eye-tracking study that compares two error types (letter transpositions and naturally occurring misspelling) and two error rates (10% or 50% of all words contain errors). We find that human readers show unimpaired comprehension in spite of these errors, but error words cau…
Transformer-based large language models are trained to make predictions about the next word by aggregating representations of previous tokens through their self-attention mechanism. In the field of cognitive modeling, such attention patterns have recently been interpreted as embodying the process of cue-based retrieval, in which attention over multiple targets is taken to generate interference and latency during retrieval. Under this framework, this work first defines an entropy-based predictor that quantifies the diffuseness of self-attention, as well as distance-based predictors that capture…
When humans read text, they fixate some words and skip others. However, there have been few attempts to explain skipping behavior with computational models, as most existing work has focused on predicting reading times (e.g.,~using surprisal). In this paper, we propose a novel approach that models both skipping and reading, using an unsupervised architecture that combines a neural attention with autoencoding, trained on raw text using reinforcement learning. Our model explains human reading behavior as a tradeoff between precision of language understanding (encoding the input accurately) and e…
Why are language models less surprised than humans? Testing the Parse Multiplicity Mismatch Hypothesis
Department of Linguistics, New York University（纽约大学语言学系）；Center for Data Science, New York University（纽约大学数据科学中心）；Department of Linguistics, University of Massachusetts Amherst（马萨诸塞大学阿默斯特分校语言学系）
By positing a relationship between naturalistic reading times and information-theoretic surprisal, surprisal theory (Hale, 2001; Levy, 2008) provides a natural interface between language models and psycholinguistic models. This paper re-evaluates a claim due to Goodkind and Bicknell (2018) that a language model's ability to model reading times is a linear function of its perplexity. By extending Goodkind and Bicknell's analysis to modern neural architectures, we show that the proposed relation does not always hold for Long Short-Term Memory networks, Transformers, and pre-trained models. We in…
Human-like fleeting memory improves language learning but impairs reading time prediction in transformer language models
University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Brain and Cognition（阿姆斯特丹大学，阿姆斯特丹脑与认知中心）；Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Informatics（阿姆斯特丹自由大学，信息学院）；Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics（马克斯·普朗克心理学语言学研究所）
Structure leads and dominates comprehension in naturalistic reading
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester（罗切斯特大学脑科学与认知科学系）；Department of Linguistics and Modern Languages, the Chinese University of Hong Kong（香港中文大学语言学与现代语言系）；Department of Language Science, University of California Irvine（加州大学 Irvine 分校语言科学系）
Reading a document and extracting an answer to a question about its content has attracted substantial attention recently. While most work has focused on the interaction between the question and the document, in this work we evaluate the importance of context when the question and document are processed independently. We take a standard neural architecture for this task, and show that by providing rich contextualized word representations from a large pre-trained language model as well as allowing the model to choose between context-dependent and context-independent word representations, we can …
Harvard University（哈佛大学）；Massachusetts Institute of Technology（麻省理工学院）
Human reading behavior is tuned to the statistics of natural language: the time it takes human subjects to read a word can be predicted from estimates of the word's probability in context. However, it remains an open question what computational architecture best characterizes the expectations deployed in real time by humans that determine the behavioral signatures of reading. Here we test over two dozen models, independently manipulating computational architecture and training dataset size, on how well their next-word expectations predict human reading time behavior on naturalistic text corpor…
