Plausibility as Commonsense Reasoning: Humans Succeed, Large Language Models Do not

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04825v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 16:27:06 GMT
• Title: Plausibility as Commonsense Reasoning: Humans Succeed, Large Language Models Do not
• Abstract summary: We test whether large language models integrate world knowledge with syntactic structure in a human-like, structure-sensitive way during ambiguity resolution.<n>We construct ambiguous items that keep the syntactic configuration fixed and ensure both parses remain pragmatically possible.<n>In a speeded forced-choice comprehension experiment, humans show a large, correctly directed plausibility effect.<n>Across models, plausibility-driven shifts are weak, unstable, or reversed.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models achieve strong performance on many language tasks, yet it remains unclear whether they integrate world knowledge with syntactic structure in a human-like, structure-sensitive way during ambiguity resolution. We test this question in Turkish prenominal relative-clause attachment ambiguities, where the same surface string permits high attachment (HA) or low attachment (LA). We construct ambiguous items that keep the syntactic configuration fixed and ensure both parses remain pragmatically possible, while graded event plausibility selectively favors High Attachment vs.\ Low Attachment. The contrasts are validated with independent norming ratings. In a speeded forced-choice comprehension experiment, humans show a large, correctly directed plausibility effect. We then evaluate Turkish and multilingual LLMs in a parallel preference-based setup that compares matched HA/LA continuations via mean per-token log-probability. Across models, plausibility-driven shifts are weak, unstable, or reversed. The results suggest that, in the tested models, plausibility information does not guide attachment preferences as reliably as it does in human judgments, and they highlight Turkish RC attachment as a useful cross-linguistic diagnostic beyond broad benchmarks.

Related papers

• Inference-Time Steering for Cross-Lingual Factual Consistency in LLMs [51.56484100374058]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable multilingual fluency, but their internal knowledge representations remain disproportionately biased toward high-resource languages.<n>We investigate whether these biases can be mitigated at inference time, forcing an English-prompted model to answer as if it were queried in target languages.<n>Experiments on Gemma 3 12B Instruct reveal persona prompting to be the strongest overall intervention, balancing efficacy, safety, and out-of-domain generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-21T16:15:05Z)
• Lower-Resource, Higher Scores: Language Bias in LLM Evaluators [27.959960538188753]
  We conduct experiments with semantically identical instruction-response pairs across 23 languages.<n>We find that multilingual evaluators assign significantly different scores to different evaluation languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-16T01:53:09Z)
• Lost in Interpretation: The Plausibility-Faithfulness Trade-off in Cross-Lingual Explanations [7.934534873467547]
  We find that English explanations frequently produce fluent but loosely anchored rationales.<n>For socially nuanced classification, English pivots also fail to preserve pragmatic cues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T02:44:48Z)
• Fine-tuning vs. In-context Learning in Large Language Models: A Formal Language Learning Perspective [15.30367035674579]
  Large language models (LLMs) operate in two fundamental learning modes - fine-tuning (FT) and in-context learning (ICL)<n>Prior studies comparing FT and ICL have yielded mixed and inconclusive results due to inconsistent experimental setups.<n>We propose a formal language learning task offering precise language boundaries, controlled string sampling, and no data contamination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-25T12:19:25Z)
• All Languages Matter: Understanding and Mitigating Language Bias in Multilingual RAG [87.74635133954975]
  We show that current Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Generation (mRAG) systems suffer from a language bias during reranking.<n>We propose textittextbfLanguage-textbfAgnostic textbfUtility-driven textbfReranker textbfAlignment (LAURA), which aligns multilingual evidence ranking with downstream generative utility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T05:33:06Z)
• Is my model perplexed for the right reason? Contrasting LLMs' Benchmark Behavior with Token-Level Perplexity [6.285055089721361]
  We introduce a principled interpretability framework based on token-level perplexity to test whether models rely on linguistically relevant cues.<n>Our method enables precise, hypothesis-driven analysis without relying on unstable feature-attribution techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-31T08:00:55Z)
• Mitigating Translationese Bias in Multilingual LLM-as-a-Judge via Disentangled Information Bottleneck [37.780081880731096]
  Large language models (LLMs) have become a standard for multilingual evaluation, yet they exhibit a severe systematic translationese bias.<n>We attribute this bias to spurious correlations with (i) latent manifold alignment with English and (ii) cross-lingual predictability.<n>To mitigate this bias, we propose DIBJudge, a robust fine-tuning framework that learns a minimally sufficient, judgment-critical representation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T02:55:29Z)
• Cross-Lingual Stability of LLM Judges Under Controlled Generation: Evidence from Finno-Ugric Languages [0.22009842278462158]
  Cross-lingual evaluation of large language models (LLMs) typically conflates two sources of variance: genuine model performance differences and measurement instability.<n>We investigate evaluation reliability by holding generation conditions constant while varying target language.<n>Our findings suggest that zero-shot judge transfer is unreliable for discourse-level assessment in morphologically rich languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T16:27:32Z)
• Parallel Universes, Parallel Languages: A Comprehensive Study on LLM-based Multilingual Counterfactual Example Generation [49.2073409243885]
  Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating English counterfactuals and demonstrate multilingual proficiency.<n>We conduct automatic evaluations on both directly generated counterfactuals in the target languages and those derived via English translation across six languages.<n>We identify and categorize four main types of errors that consistently appear in the generated counterfactuals across languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-01T08:53:49Z)
• On the Entity-Level Alignment in Crosslingual Consistency [62.33186691736433]
  SubSub and SubInj integrate English translations of subjects into prompts across languages, leading to substantial gains in factual recall accuracy and consistency.<n>These interventions reinforce the entity representation alignment in the conceptual space through model's internal pivot-language processing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-11T16:26:50Z)
• Do What? Teaching Vision-Language-Action Models to Reject the Impossible [53.40183895299108]
  Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have demonstrated strong performance on a range of robotic tasks.<n>We propose Instruct-Verify-and-Act (IVA), a framework that detects when an instruction cannot be executed due to a false premise.<n>Our experiments show that IVA improves false premise detection accuracy by 97.56% over baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T10:54:33Z)
• Evaluating Multilingual and Code-Switched Alignment in LLMs via Synthetic Natural Language Inference [2.172419551358714]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in multilingual contexts, yet their capacity for consistent, logically grounded alignment across languages remains underexplored.<n>We present a framework for multilingual natural language inference that generates synthetic, logic-based premise-hypothesis pairs and translates them into a typologically diverse set of languages.<n>Code-switching does not degrade, and can even improve, performance, suggesting that translation-induced lexical variation may serve as a regularization signal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T14:30:34Z)
• Estimating Commonsense Plausibility through Semantic Shifts [66.06254418551737]
  We propose ComPaSS, a novel discriminative framework that quantifies commonsense plausibility by measuring semantic shifts.<n> Evaluations on two types of fine-grained commonsense plausibility estimation tasks show that ComPaSS consistently outperforms baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T06:31:06Z)
• Large Language Models can Contrastively Refine their Generation for Better Sentence Representation Learning [57.74233319453229]
  Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as a groundbreaking technology and their unparalleled text generation capabilities have sparked interest in their application to the fundamental sentence representation learning task. We propose MultiCSR, a multi-level contrastive sentence representation learning framework that decomposes the process of prompting LLMs to generate a corpus. Our experiments reveal that MultiCSR enables a less advanced LLM to surpass the performance of ChatGPT, while applying it to ChatGPT achieves better state-of-the-art results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T03:21:43Z)
• 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)
• 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)

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.