REVIEW 2 cited by
BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for English
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
BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for English
read the original abstract
We introduce The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs (shortened to BLiMP), a challenge set for evaluating what language models (LMs) know about major grammatical phenomena in English. BLiMP consists of 67 sub-datasets, each containing 1000 minimal pairs isolating specific contrasts in syntax, morphology, or semantics. The data is automatically generated according to expert-crafted grammars, and aggregate human agreement with the labels is 96.4%. We use it to evaluate n-gram, LSTM, and Transformer (GPT-2 and Transformer-XL) LMs. We find that state-of-the-art models identify morphological contrasts reliably, but they struggle with semantic restrictions on the distribution of quantifiers and negative polarity items and subtle syntactic phenomena such as extraction islands.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Natural Ungrokking: Asymmetric Control of Which Rules Survive Pretraining
During pretraining, language models exhibit natural ungrokking where learned rules are forgotten based on their support frequency in the corpus, with asymmetric editability of rule survival.
-
A framework for analyzing concept representations in neural models
A new framework shows concept subspaces are not unique, estimator choice affects containment and disentanglement, LEACE works well but generalizes poorly, and HuBERT encodes phone info as contained and disentangled fr...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.