William Timkey

William Timkey, Tal Linzen

Two of the central factors believed to underpin human sentence processing difficulty are expectations and retrieval from working memory. A recent attempt to create a unified cognitive model integrating these two factors relied on the parallels between the self-attention mechanism of transformer language models and cue-based retrieval theories of working memory in human sentence processing (Ryu and Lewis 2021). While Ryu and Lewis show that attention patterns in specialized attention heads of GPT-2 are consistent with similarity-based interference, a key prediction of cue-based retrieval models, their method requires identifying syntactically specialized attention heads, and makes the cognitively implausible assumption that hundreds of memory retrieval operations take place in parallel. In the present work, we develop a recurrent neural language model with a single self-attention head, which more closely parallels the memory system assumed by cognitive theories. We show that our model's single attention head captures semantic and syntactic interference effects observed in human experiments.

William Timkey, Brian Dillon, Tal Linzen

Surprisal theory posits that the processing difficulty of a word is determined by its predictability in context, offering a potential link between human sentence processing and next-word predictions from language models. While language model (LM) surprisals successfully predict reading times in naturalistic text, they systematically underpredict the magnitude of difficulty observed in controlled studies of syntactic ambiguity, particularly in garden path sentences. This mismatch might arise from differences in the computational constraints between humans and LMs. Here we test one such hypothesis, specifically, that LMs may be able to simultaneously consider a greater number of distinct sentence interpretations at once, compared to humans. Using Recurrent Neural Network Grammars (RNNGs) with word-synchronous beam search, we systematically vary the number of simultaneous parses used to compute word surprisal, and then use these surprisals to predict human reading times. Reducing the number of simultaneous active parses indeed increases the magnitude of predicted garden path effects, but not nearly enough to capture the full magnitude of the effects in humans. This suggests that differences in the number of simultaneous parses available to LMs and humans cannot reconcile LM-based surprisal with human sentence processing.

William Timkey, Marten van Schijndel

Similarity measures are a vital tool for understanding how language models represent and process language. Standard representational similarity measures such as cosine similarity and Euclidean distance have been successfully used in static word embedding models to understand how words cluster in semantic space. Recently, these measures have been applied to embeddings from contextualized models such as BERT and GPT-2. In this work, we call into question the informativity of such measures for contextualized language models. We find that a small number of rogue dimensions, often just 1-3, dominate these measures. Moreover, we find a striking mismatch between the dimensions that dominate similarity measures and those which are important to the behavior of the model. We show that simple postprocessing techniques such as standardization are able to correct for rogue dimensions and reveal underlying representational quality. We argue that accounting for rogue dimensions is essential for any similarity-based analysis of contextual language models.

Matt Wilber, William Timkey, Marten Van Schijndel

Abstractive neural summarization models have seen great improvements in recent years, as shown by ROUGE scores of the generated summaries. But despite these improved metrics, there is limited understanding of the strategies different models employ, and how those strategies relate their understanding of language. To understand this better, we run several experiments to characterize how one popular abstractive model, the pointer-generator model of See et al. (2017), uses its explicit copy/generation switch to control its level of abstraction (generation) vs extraction (copying). On an extractive-biased dataset, the model utilizes syntactic boundaries to truncate sentences that are otherwise often copied verbatim. When we modify the copy/generation switch and force the model to generate, only simple paraphrasing abilities are revealed alongside factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. On an abstractive-biased dataset, the model copies infrequently but shows similarly limited abstractive abilities. In line with previous research, these results suggest that abstractive summarization models lack the semantic understanding necessary to generate paraphrases that are both abstractive and faithful to the source document.