Reverse-Engineering the Reader

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13086v1
• Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 23:05:01 GMT
• Title: Reverse-Engineering the Reader
• Authors: Samuel Kiegeland, Ethan Gotlieb Wilcox, Afra Amini, David Robert Reich, Ryan Cotterell,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a novel alignment technique in which we fine-tune a language model to implicitly optimize the parameters of a linear regressor. Using words as a test case, we evaluate our technique across multiple model sizes and datasets. We find an inverse relationship between psychometric power and a model's performance on downstream NLP tasks as well as its perplexity on held-out test data.
• Score: 43.26660964074272
• License:
• Abstract: Numerous previous studies have sought to determine to what extent language models, pretrained on natural language text, can serve as useful models of human cognition. In this paper, we are interested in the opposite question: whether we can directly optimize a language model to be a useful cognitive model by aligning it to human psychometric data. To achieve this, we introduce a novel alignment technique in which we fine-tune a language model to implicitly optimize the parameters of a linear regressor that directly predicts humans' reading times of in-context linguistic units, e.g., phonemes, morphemes, or words, using surprisal estimates derived from the language model. Using words as a test case, we evaluate our technique across multiple model sizes and datasets and find that it improves language models' psychometric predictive power. However, we find an inverse relationship between psychometric power and a model's performance on downstream NLP tasks as well as its perplexity on held-out test data. While this latter trend has been observed before (Oh et al., 2022; Shain et al., 2024), we are the first to induce it by manipulating a model's alignment to psychometric data.

Related papers

• A Probability--Quality Trade-off in Aligned Language Models and its Relation to Sampling Adaptors [50.046717886067555]
  We show that when sampling corpora from an aligned language model, there exists a trade-off between the strings' average reward and average log-likelihood. We provide a formal treatment of this phenomenon and demonstrate how a choice of sampling adaptor allows for a selection of how much likelihood we exchange for the reward.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T17:38:21Z)
• Can training neural language models on a curriculum with developmentally plausible data improve alignment with human reading behavior? [0.2745342790938508]
  This paper explores the extent to which the misalignment between empirical and model-predicted behavior can be minimized by training models on more developmentally plausible data. We trained teacher language models on the BabyLM "strict-small" dataset and used sentence level surprisal estimates from these teacher models to create a curriculum. We found tentative evidence that our curriculum made it easier for models to acquire linguistic knowledge from the training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-30T18:03:58Z)
• Humans and language models diverge when predicting repeating text [52.03471802608112]
  We present a scenario in which the performance of humans and LMs diverges. Human and GPT-2 LM predictions are strongly aligned in the first presentation of a text span, but their performance quickly diverges when memory begins to play a role. We hope that this scenario will spur future work in bringing LMs closer to human behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T08:24:28Z)
• Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human Reading Times Best with About Two Billion Training Tokens [17.80735287413141]
  We evaluate surprisal estimates from Transformer-based language model variants on their ability to predict human reading times. Results show that surprisal estimates from most variants with contemporary model capacities provide the best fit after seeing about two billion training tokens. Newly-trained smaller model variants reveal a 'tipping point' at convergence, after which the decrease in language model perplexity begins to result in poorer fits to human reading times.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-22T12:50:49Z)
• Chain of Hindsight Aligns Language Models with Feedback [62.68665658130472]
  We propose a novel technique, Chain of Hindsight, that is easy to optimize and can learn from any form of feedback, regardless of its polarity. We convert all types of feedback into sequences of sentences, which are then used to fine-tune the model. By doing so, the model is trained to generate outputs based on feedback, while learning to identify and correct negative attributes or errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T10:28:16Z)
• Training Language Models with Natural Language Feedback [51.36137482891037]
  We learn from language feedback on model outputs using a three-step learning algorithm. In synthetic experiments, we first evaluate whether language models accurately incorporate feedback to produce refinements. Using only 100 samples of human-written feedback, our learning algorithm finetunes a GPT-3 model to roughly human-level summarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-29T15:06:58Z)
• Multilingual Language Models Predict Human Reading Behavior [8.830621849672108]
  We compare the performance of language-specific and multilingual pretrained transformer models to predict reading time measures. We find that BERT and XLM models successfully predict a range of eye tracking features. In a series of experiments, we analyze the cross-domain and cross-language abilities of these models and show how they reflect human sentence processing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-12T13:03:49Z)
• Unsupervised Paraphrasing with Pretrained Language Models [85.03373221588707]
  We propose a training pipeline that enables pre-trained language models to generate high-quality paraphrases in an unsupervised setting. Our recipe consists of task-adaptation, self-supervision, and a novel decoding algorithm named Dynamic Blocking. We show with automatic and human evaluations that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on both the Quora Question Pair and the ParaNMT datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-24T11:55:28Z)
• Probabilistic Predictions of People Perusing: Evaluating Metrics of Language Model Performance for Psycholinguistic Modeling [0.8668211481067458]
  We re-evaluate a claim due to Goodkind and Bicknell that a language model's ability to model reading times is a linear function of its perplexity. We show that the proposed relation does not always hold for Long Short-Term Memory networks, Transformers, and pre-trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-08T19:12:06Z)
• On the Predictive Power of Neural Language Models for Human Real-Time Comprehension Behavior [29.260666424382446]
  We test over two dozen models on how well their next-word expectations predict human reading time on naturalistic text corpora. We evaluate how features of these models determine their psychometric predictive power, or ability to predict human reading behavior. For any given perplexity, deep Transformer models and n-gram models show superior psychometric predictive power over LSTM or structurally supervised neural models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-02T19:47:01Z)

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.