Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Context Limitations Make Neural Language Models More Human-Like

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 2205.11463 v2 pith:VNP5CNYA submitted 2022-05-23 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords contextaccesscognitivehumanslanguagemodelsneuralreading
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Language models (LMs) have been used in cognitive modeling as well as engineering studies -- they compute information-theoretic complexity metrics that simulate humans' cognitive load during reading. This study highlights a limitation of modern neural LMs as the model of choice for this purpose: there is a discrepancy between their context access capacities and that of humans. Our results showed that constraining the LMs' context access improved their simulation of human reading behavior. We also showed that LM-human gaps in context access were associated with specific syntactic constructions; incorporating syntactic biases into LMs' context access might enhance their cognitive plausibility.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Mass-Scale Analysis of In-the-Wild Conversations Reveals Complexity Bounds on LLM Jailbreaking

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Across 2M+ in-the-wild LLM conversations, jailbreak attempts show no higher complexity than normal chats, and assistant toxicity has declined over time, suggesting bounded attack sophistication.

Pith tools