TL;DR
This paper investigates how neural network representations of language compare to human cognition, revealing both similarities in abstract rule learning and differences in systematicity and generalization, informing AI development and psychological understanding.
Contribution
It introduces diagnostic tests for neural language representations, analyzes their systematicity, and explores how training data influences their ability to learn and generalize rules.
Findings
Neural models show some capacity for abstract rule learning.
Representations exhibit heuristic strategies and lack full systematicity.
Training data and augmentations affect generalization and heuristic use.
Abstract
As modern deep networks become more complex, and get closer to human-like capabilities in certain domains, the question arises of how the representations and decision rules they learn compare to the ones in humans. In this work, we study representations of sentences in one such artificial system for natural language processing. We first present a diagnostic test dataset to examine the degree of abstract composable structure represented. Analyzing performance on these diagnostic tests indicates a lack of systematicity in the representations and decision rules, and reveals a set of heuristic strategies. We then investigate the effect of the training distribution on learning these heuristic strategies, and study changes in these representations with various augmentations to the training set. Our results reveal parallels to the analogous representations in people. We find that these systems…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
