Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Rearranging the Familiar: Testing Compositional Generalization in Recurrent Networks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1807.07545 v1 pith:P63647GO submitted 2018-07-19 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG
keywords aroundrightgeneralizationnovelmodelscompositionalcompositionalitygeneralizing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Systematic compositionality is the ability to recombine meaningful units with regular and predictable outcomes, and it's seen as key to humans' capacity for generalization in language. Recent work has studied systematic compositionality in modern seq2seq models using generalization to novel navigation instructions in a grounded environment as a probing tool, requiring models to quickly bootstrap the meaning of new words. We extend this framework here to settings where the model needs only to recombine well-trained functional words (such as "around" and "right") in novel contexts. Our findings confirm and strengthen the earlier ones: seq2seq models can be impressively good at generalizing to novel combinations of previously-seen input, but only when they receive extensive training on the specific pattern to be generalized (e.g., generalizing from many examples of "X around right" to "jump around right"), while failing when generalization requires novel application of compositional rules (e.g., inferring the meaning of "around right" from those of "right" and "around").

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Higher-order Comparisons of Sentence Encoder Representations

    cs.CL 2019-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Sentences that take humans longer to read also show larger disagreement between layers of pretrained language encoders.

Pith tools