Ye-eun Cho

Ye-eun Cho, Seong mook Kim

This study investigates how Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) and GPT-2 (Radford et al., 2019), engage in pragmatic inference of scalar implicature, such as some. Two sets of experiments were conducted using cosine similarity and next sentence/token prediction as experimental methods. The results in experiment 1 showed that, both models interpret some as pragmatic implicature not all in the absence of context, aligning with human language processing. In experiment 2, in which Question Under Discussion (QUD) was presented as a contextual cue, BERT showed consistent performance regardless of types of QUDs, while GPT-2 encountered processing difficulties since a certain type of QUD required pragmatic inference for implicature. The findings revealed that, in terms of theoretical approaches, BERT inherently incorporates pragmatic implicature not all within the term some, adhering to Default model (Levinson, 2000). In contrast, GPT-2 seems to encounter processing difficulties in inferring pragmatic implicature within context, consistent with Context-driven model (Sperber and Wilson, 2002).

Ye-eun Cho

Evaluating pragmatic reasoning in large language models (LLMs) remains challenging because model behavior can vary depending on evaluation methods. Previous studies suggest that prompt-based judgments may diverge from models' internal probability distributions, raising questions about whether observed performance reflects underlying competence or task-induced behavior. This study examines this issue using scalar diversity as a graded diagnostic for pragmatic inference. Following Hu & Levy (2023), this study compares direct probability measurement and metalinguistic prompting across multiple models and experimental settings. The results show that neither evaluation method consistently outperforms the other and that pragmatic behavior varies substantially across model families, prompting strategies, and task structures. Moreover, scalar diversity gradients emerge only in specific model-condition combinations, suggesting that pragmatic reasoning in LLMs reflects an interaction between internal probabilistic representations and task-induced prompting behavior rather than a stable competence captured by a single evaluation paradigm. These findings highlight the central role of evaluation design in interpreting pragmatic abilities in LLMs.

Ye-eun Cho

Pragmatic inference is inherently graded. Different lexical items give rise to pragmatic enrichment to different degrees. Scalar implicature exemplifies this property through scalar diversity, where implicature strength varies across scalar items. However, evaluations of pragmatic inference in large language models (LLMs) often rely on prompt-based manipulations. Beyond prompt-level effects, this study introduces Continuous Interpretive Steering (CIS), a method that probes graded pragmatic interpretation by treating activation-level steering strength as a continuous experimental variable. To support this analysis, this study introduces a new dataset, GraSD, which encodes graded scalar diversity. Experiments on four LLMs show that uniform activation steering increases pragmatic interpretations globally but collapses item-level variation, whereas graded activation steering yields differentiated interpretive shifts aligned with scalar diversity grades. It indicates that graded sensitivity is encoded in the representation space and can be systematically recovered through controlled intervention. Together, CIS and GraSD provide a principled framework for evaluating graded pragmatic sensitivity in LLMs.

Ye-eun Cho, Yunho Maeng

This study investigates whether vision-language models (VLMs) can perform pragmatic inference, focusing on ignorance implicatures, utterances that imply the speaker's lack of precise knowledge. To test this, we systematically manipulated contextual cues: the visually depicted situation (visual cue) and QUD-based linguistic prompts (linguistic cue). When only visual cues were provided, three state-of-the-art VLMs (GPT-4o, Gemini 1.5 Pro, and Claude 3.5 sonnet) produced interpretations largely based on the lexical meaning of the modified numerals. When linguistic cues were added to enhance contextual informativeness, Claude exhibited more human-like inference by integrating both types of contextual cues. In contrast, GPT and Gemini favored precise, literal interpretations. Although the influence of contextual cues increased, they treated each contextual cue independently and aligned them with semantic features rather than engaging in context-driven reasoning. These findings suggest that although the models differ in how they handle contextual cues, Claude's ability to combine multiple cues may signal emerging pragmatic competence in multimodal models.