Do language models accommodate their users? A study of linguistic convergence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.03276v1
• Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2025 09:55:40 GMT
• Title: Do language models accommodate their users? A study of linguistic convergence
• Authors: Terra Blevins, Susanne Schmalwieser, Benjamin Roth,
• Abstract summary: We find that models strongly converge to the conversation's style, often significantly overfitting relative to the human baseline.<n>We observe consistent shifts in convergence across modeling settings, with instruction-tuned and larger models converging less than their pretrained counterparts.
• Score: 15.958711524171362
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: While large language models (LLMs) are generally considered proficient in generating language, how similar their language usage is to that of humans remains understudied. In this paper, we test whether models exhibit linguistic convergence, a core pragmatic element of human language communication, asking: do models adapt, or converge, to the linguistic patterns of their user? To answer this, we systematically compare model completions of exisiting dialogues to the original human responses across sixteen language models, three dialogue corpora, and a variety of stylometric features. We find that models strongly converge to the conversation's style, often significantly overfitting relative to the human baseline. While convergence patterns are often feature-specific, we observe consistent shifts in convergence across modeling settings, with instruction-tuned and larger models converging less than their pretrained counterparts. Given the differences between human and model convergence patterns, we hypothesize that the underlying mechanisms for these behaviors are very different.

Related papers

• Cat, Rat, Meow: On the Alignment of Language Model and Human Term-Similarity Judgments [4.856605865350511]
  We evaluate 32 publicly available language models for their representational and behavioral alignment with human similarity judgments.<n>We find that even the representations of small language models can achieve human-level alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T17:59:57Z)
• Modeling language contact with the Iterated Learning Model [0.0]
  Iterated learning models are agent-based models of language change. A recently introduced type of iterated learning model, the Semi-Supervised ILM is used to simulate language contact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T01:43:23Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models on Controlled Generation Tasks [92.64781370921486]
  We present an extensive analysis of various benchmarks including a sentence planning benchmark with different granularities. After comparing large language models against state-of-the-start finetuned smaller models, we present a spectrum showing large language models falling behind, are comparable, or exceed the ability of smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T03:48:24Z)
• A fine-grained comparison of pragmatic language understanding in humans and language models [2.231167375820083]
  We compare language models and humans on seven pragmatic phenomena. We find that the largest models achieve high accuracy and match human error patterns. Preliminary evidence that models and humans are sensitive to similar linguistic cues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-13T18:34:59Z)
• Analyzing the Mono- and Cross-Lingual Pretraining Dynamics of Multilingual Language Models [73.11488464916668]
  This study investigates the dynamics of the multilingual pretraining process. We probe checkpoints taken from throughout XLM-R pretraining, using a suite of linguistic tasks. Our analysis shows that the model achieves high in-language performance early on, with lower-level linguistic skills acquired before more complex ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-24T03:35:00Z)
• Testing the Ability of Language Models to Interpret Figurative Language [69.59943454934799]
  Figurative and metaphorical language are commonplace in discourse. It remains an open question to what extent modern language models can interpret nonliteral phrases. We introduce Fig-QA, a Winograd-style nonliteral language understanding task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-26T23:42:22Z)
• Discovering Representation Sprachbund For Multilingual Pre-Training [139.05668687865688]
  We generate language representation from multilingual pre-trained models and conduct linguistic analysis. We cluster all the target languages into multiple groups and name each group as a representation sprachbund. Experiments are conducted on cross-lingual benchmarks and significant improvements are achieved compared to strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-01T09:32:06Z)
• Uncovering Constraint-Based Behavior in Neural Models via Targeted Fine-Tuning [9.391375268580806]
  We show that competing linguistic processes within a language obscure underlying linguistic knowledge. While human behavior has been found to be similar across languages, we find cross-linguistic variation in model behavior. Our results suggest that models need to learn both the linguistic constraints in a language and their relative ranking, with mismatches in either producing non-human-like behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T14:52:11Z)
• Mechanisms for Handling Nested Dependencies in Neural-Network Language Models and Humans [75.15855405318855]
  We studied whether a modern artificial neural network trained with "deep learning" methods mimics a central aspect of human sentence processing. Although the network was solely trained to predict the next word in a large corpus, analysis showed the emergence of specialized units that successfully handled local and long-distance syntactic agreement. We tested the model's predictions in a behavioral experiment where humans detected violations in number agreement in sentences with systematic variations in the singular/plural status of multiple nouns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-19T12:00:05Z)
• Recurrent Neural Network Language Models Always Learn English-Like Relative Clause Attachment [17.995905582226463]
  We compare model performance in English and Spanish to show that non-linguistic biases in RNN LMs advantageously overlap with syntactic structure in English but not Spanish. English models may appear to acquire human-like syntactic preferences, while models trained on Spanish fail to acquire comparable human-like preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T01:21:47Z)
• Limits of Detecting Text Generated by Large-Scale Language Models [65.46403462928319]
  Some consider large-scale language models that can generate long and coherent pieces of text as dangerous, since they may be used in misinformation campaigns. Here we formulate large-scale language model output detection as a hypothesis testing problem to classify text as genuine or generated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-09T19:53:23Z)

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.