Meaning without reference in large language models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.02957v1
• Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 02:48:26 GMT
• Title: Meaning without reference in large language models
• Authors: Steven T. Piantasodi and Felix Hill
• Abstract summary: We argue that large language models (LLMs) likely capture important aspects of meaning. Because conceptual role is defined by the relationships between internal representational states, meaning cannot be determined from a model's architecture.
• Score: 14.26628686684198
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The widespread success of large language models (LLMs) has been met with skepticism that they possess anything like human concepts or meanings. Contrary to claims that LLMs possess no meaning whatsoever, we argue that they likely capture important aspects of meaning, and moreover work in a way that approximates a compelling account of human cognition in which meaning arises from conceptual role. Because conceptual role is defined by the relationships between internal representational states, meaning cannot be determined from a model's architecture, training data, or objective function, but only by examination of how its internal states relate to each other. This approach may clarify why and how LLMs are so successful and suggest how they can be made more human-like.

Related papers

• Mechanistic Indicators of Understanding in Large Language Models [2.752171077382186]
  We argue that Large Language Models (LLMs) develop internal structures that are functionally analogous to the kind of understanding that consists in seeing connections.<n> conceptual understanding emerges when a model forms "features" as directions in latent space, learning the connections between diverse manifestations of something.<n>Second, state-of-the-world understanding emerges when a model learns contingent factual connections between features and dynamically tracks changes in the world.<n>Third, principled understanding emerges when a model ceases to rely on a collection of memorized facts and discovers a "circuit" connecting these facts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-07T20:26:31Z)
• From Tokens to Thoughts: How LLMs and Humans Trade Compression for Meaning [52.32745233116143]
  Humans organize knowledge into compact categories through semantic compression.<n>Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable linguistic abilities.<n>But whether their internal representations strike a human-like trade-off between compression and semantic fidelity is unclear.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-21T16:29:00Z)
• How Deep is Love in LLMs' Hearts? Exploring Semantic Size in Human-like Cognition [75.11808682808065]
  This study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) exhibit similar tendencies in understanding semantic size. Our findings reveal that multi-modal training is crucial for LLMs to achieve more human-like understanding. Lastly, we examine whether LLMs are influenced by attention-grabbing headlines with larger semantic sizes in a real-world web shopping scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-01T03:35:56Z)
• Non-literal Understanding of Number Words by Language Models [33.24263583093367]
  Humans naturally interpret numbers non-literally, combining context, world knowledge, and speaker intent. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) interpret numbers similarly, focusing on hyperbole and pragmatic halo effects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T07:03:00Z)
• Human-like conceptual representations emerge from language prediction [72.5875173689788]
  Large language models (LLMs) trained exclusively through next-token prediction over language data exhibit remarkably human-like behaviors. Are these models developing concepts akin to humans, and if so, how are such concepts represented and organized? Our results demonstrate that LLMs can flexibly derive concepts from linguistic descriptions in relation to contextual cues about other concepts. These findings establish that structured, human-like conceptual representations can naturally emerge from language prediction without real-world grounding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-21T23:54:17Z)
• Large Language Models Reflect the Ideology of their Creators [71.65505524599888]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on vast amounts of data to generate natural language. This paper shows that the ideological stance of an LLM appears to reflect the worldview of its creators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T04:02:30Z)
• Large Models of What? Mistaking Engineering Achievements for Human Linguistic Agency [0.11510009152620666]
  We argue that claims regarding linguistic capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) are based on at least two unfounded assumptions. Language completeness assumes that a distinct and complete thing such as a natural language' exists. The assumption of data completeness relies on the belief that a language can be quantified and wholly captured by data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-11T18:06:01Z)
• Perceptions to Beliefs: Exploring Precursory Inferences for Theory of Mind in Large Language Models [51.91448005607405]
  We evaluate key human ToM precursors by annotating characters' perceptions on ToMi and FANToM. We present PercepToM, a novel ToM method leveraging LLMs' strong perception inference capability while supplementing their limited perception-to-belief inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T14:58:29Z)
• Human-like object concept representations emerge naturally in multimodal large language models [24.003766123531545]
  We combined behavioral and neuroimaging analysis methods to uncover how the object concept representations in Large Language Models correlate with those of humans. The resulting 66-dimensional embeddings were found to be highly stable and predictive, and exhibited semantic clustering akin to human mental representations. This study advances our understanding of machine intelligence and informs the development of more human-like artificial cognitive systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-01T08:17:19Z)
• LLMs as Models for Analogical Reasoning [14.412456982731467]
  Analogical reasoning is fundamental to human cognition and learning. Recent studies have shown that large language models can sometimes match humans in analogical reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-19T20:07:37Z)
• From Form(s) to Meaning: Probing the Semantic Depths of Language Models Using Multisense Consistency [13.154753046052527]
  We focus on consistency across languages as well as paraphrases. We find that the model's multisense consistency is lacking and run several follow-up analyses to verify. We conclude that, in this aspect, the understanding of LLMs is still quite far from being consistent and human-like.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-18T12:48:17Z)
• Language Models Represent Beliefs of Self and Others [14.630775330165529]
  We show that it is possible to linearly decode the belief status from the perspectives of various agents through neural activations of language models. We observe dramatic changes in the models' ToM performance, underscoring their pivotal role in the social reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-28T17:25:59Z)
• Interpreting Pretrained Language Models via Concept Bottlenecks [55.47515772358389]
  Pretrained language models (PLMs) have made significant strides in various natural language processing tasks. The lack of interpretability due to their black-box'' nature poses challenges for responsible implementation. We propose a novel approach to interpreting PLMs by employing high-level, meaningful concepts that are easily understandable for humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T20:41:18Z)
• Towards Concept-Aware Large Language Models [56.48016300758356]
  Concepts play a pivotal role in various human cognitive functions, including learning, reasoning and communication. There is very little work on endowing machines with the ability to form and reason with concepts. In this work, we analyze how well contemporary large language models (LLMs) capture human concepts and their structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:19:22Z)
• The Neuro-Symbolic Inverse Planning Engine (NIPE): Modeling Probabilistic Social Inferences from Linguistic Inputs [50.32802502923367]
  We study the process of language driving and influencing social reasoning in a probabilistic goal inference domain. We propose a neuro-symbolic model that carries out goal inference from linguistic inputs of agent scenarios. Our model closely matches human response patterns and better predicts human judgements than using an LLM alone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-25T19:38:01Z)
• Large Language Models are In-Context Semantic Reasoners rather than Symbolic Reasoners [75.85554779782048]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have excited the natural language and machine learning community over recent years. Despite of numerous successful applications, the underlying mechanism of such in-context capabilities still remains unclear. In this work, we hypothesize that the learned textitsemantics of language tokens do the most heavy lifting during the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T07:33:34Z)
• The Goldilocks of Pragmatic Understanding: Fine-Tuning Strategy Matters for Implicature Resolution by LLMs [26.118193748582197]
  We evaluate four categories of widely used state-of-the-art models. We find that, despite only evaluating on utterances that require a binary inference, models in three of these categories perform close to random. These results suggest that certain fine-tuning strategies are far better at inducing pragmatic understanding in models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-26T19:04:23Z)
• Are Representations Built from the Ground Up? An Empirical Examination of Local Composition in Language Models [91.3755431537592]
  Representing compositional and non-compositional phrases is critical for language understanding. We first formulate a problem of predicting the LM-internal representations of longer phrases given those of their constituents. While we would expect the predictive accuracy to correlate with human judgments of semantic compositionality, we find this is largely not the case.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-07T14:21:30Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.