Investigating large language models for their competence in extracting grammatically sound sentences from transcribed noisy utterances

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05099v1
• Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2024 14:55:20 GMT
• Title: Investigating large language models for their competence in extracting grammatically sound sentences from transcribed noisy utterances
• Authors: Alina Wróblewska,
• Abstract summary: Humans exhibit remarkable cognitive abilities to separate semantically significant content from speech-specific noise. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can effectively perform analogical speech comprehension tasks.
• Score: 1.3597551064547497
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Selectively processing noisy utterances while effectively disregarding speech-specific elements poses no considerable challenge for humans, as they exhibit remarkable cognitive abilities to separate semantically significant content from speech-specific noise (i.e. filled pauses, disfluencies, and restarts). These abilities may be driven by mechanisms based on acquired grammatical rules that compose abstract syntactic-semantic structures within utterances. Segments without syntactic and semantic significance are consistently disregarded in these structures. The structures, in tandem with lexis, likely underpin language comprehension and thus facilitate effective communication. In our study, grounded in linguistically motivated experiments, we investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can effectively perform analogical speech comprehension tasks. In particular, we examine the ability of LLMs to extract well-structured utterances from transcriptions of noisy dialogues. We conduct two evaluation experiments in the Polish language scenario, using a~dataset presumably unfamiliar to LLMs to mitigate the risk of data contamination. Our results show that not all extracted utterances are correctly structured, indicating that either LLMs do not fully acquire syntactic-semantic rules or they acquire them but cannot apply them effectively. We conclude that the ability of LLMs to comprehend noisy utterances is still relatively superficial compared to human proficiency in processing them.

Related papers

• Rolling the DICE on Idiomaticity: How LLMs Fail to Grasp Context [12.781022584125925]
  We construct a novel, controlled contrastive dataset designed to test whether LLMs can effectively use context to disambiguate idiomatic meaning. Our findings reveal that LLMs often fail to resolve idiomaticity when it is required to attend to the surrounding context. We make our code and dataset publicly available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T14:47:37Z)
• Traffic Light or Light Traffic? Investigating Phrasal Semantics in Large Language Models [41.233879429714925]
  This study critically examines the capacity of API-based large language models to comprehend phrase semantics. We assess the performance of LLMs in executing phrase semantic reasoning tasks guided by natural language instructions. We conduct detailed error analyses to interpret the limitations faced by LLMs in comprehending phrase semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T08:44:17Z)
• Developing Instruction-Following Speech Language Model Without Speech Instruction-Tuning Data [84.01401439030265]
  Recent end-to-end speech language models (SLMs) have expanded upon the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) We present a simple yet effective automatic process for creating speech-text pair data. Our model demonstrates general capabilities for speech-related tasks without the need for speech instruction-tuning data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-30T07:01:21Z)
• Can LLMs Understand the Implication of Emphasized Sentences in Dialogue? [64.72966061510375]
  Emphasis is a crucial component in human communication, which indicates the speaker's intention and implication beyond pure text in dialogue. This paper introduces Emphasized-Talk, a benchmark with emphasis-annotated dialogue samples capturing the implications of emphasis. We evaluate various Large Language Models (LLMs), both open-source and commercial, to measure their performance in understanding emphasis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T20:41:44Z)
• PhonologyBench: Evaluating Phonological Skills of Large Language Models [57.80997670335227]
  Phonology, the study of speech's structure and pronunciation rules, is a critical yet often overlooked component in Large Language Model (LLM) research. We present PhonologyBench, a novel benchmark consisting of three diagnostic tasks designed to explicitly test the phonological skills of LLMs. We observe a significant gap of 17% and 45% on Rhyme Word Generation and Syllable counting, respectively, when compared to humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-03T04:53:14Z)
• Do Pre-Trained Language Models Detect and Understand Semantic Underspecification? Ask the DUST! [4.1970767174840455]
  We study whether pre-trained language models (LMs) correctly identify and interpret underspecified sentences. Our experiments show that when interpreting underspecified sentences, LMs exhibit little uncertainty, contrary to what theoretical accounts of underspecification would predict.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T19:49:29Z)
• Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds [59.71218039095155]
  We evaluate language understanding capacities on simple inference tasks that most humans find trivial. We target (i) grammatically-specified entailments, (ii) premises with evidential adverbs of uncertainty, and (iii) monotonicity entailments. The models exhibit moderate to low performance on these evaluation sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T06:41:09Z)
• Prompting Language Models for Linguistic Structure [73.11488464916668]
  We present a structured prompting approach for linguistic structured prediction tasks. We evaluate this approach on part-of-speech tagging, named entity recognition, and sentence chunking. We find that while PLMs contain significant prior knowledge of task labels due to task leakage into the pretraining corpus, structured prompting can also retrieve linguistic structure with arbitrary labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-15T01:13:39Z)
• Discourse structure interacts with reference but not syntax in neural language models [17.995905582226463]
  We study the ability of language models (LMs) to learn interactions between different linguistic representations. We find that, contrary to humans, implicit causality only influences LM behavior for reference, not syntax. Our results suggest that LM behavior can contradict not only learned representations of discourse but also syntactic agreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-10T03:14:00Z)
• Syntactic Structure Distillation Pretraining For Bidirectional Encoders [49.483357228441434]
  We introduce a knowledge distillation strategy for injecting syntactic biases into BERT pretraining. We distill the approximate marginal distribution over words in context from the syntactic LM. Our findings demonstrate the benefits of syntactic biases, even in representation learners that exploit large amounts of data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-27T16:44:01Z)

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.