The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Targeted Syntactic Evaluation of Language Models
Open accessAbstract
We present a dataset for evaluating the grammaticality of the predictions of a language model.We automatically construct a large number of minimally different pairs of English sentences, each consisting of a grammatical and an ungrammatical sentence.The sentence pairs represent different variations of structure-sensitive phenomena: subject-verb agreement, reflexive anaphora and negative polarity items.We expect a language model to assign a higher probability to the grammatical sentence than the ungrammatical one.In an experiment using this data set, an LSTM language model performed poorly on many of the constructions.Multi-task training with a syntactic objective (CCG supertagging) improved the LSTM's accuracy, but a large gap remained between its performance and the accuracy of human participants recruited online.This suggests that there is considerable room for improvement over LSTMs in capturing syntax in a language model.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“BLiMP, and other related syntactic benchmarks such as those presented in Marvin and Linzen (2018) and Gauthier et al. (2020), were specifically designed to mimic the types of tests invented by linguists and cognitive scientists to reveal syntactic competence-i.e., they are all based on minimal pair sentences.”
From Findings of the BabyLM Challenge: Sample-Efficient Pretraining on Developmentally Plausible Corpora (2023) · cites this paper as Marvin and Linzen (2018)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404
Hochreiter, S., & Schmidhuber, J. (1997) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 · Cited by 102,318
Elman, J. L. (1990) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1402_1 · Cited by 11,212
Recurrent neural network based language model
Mikolov, T., Karafiát, M., Burget, L., Černocký, J., & Khudanpur, S. (2010) · Interspeech 2010 · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2010-343 · Cited by 5,390
SRILM - an extensible language modeling toolkit
Stolcke, A. (2002) · International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP) · doi:10.21437/icslp.2002-303 · Cited by 4,385
Neural Network Acceptability Judgments
Warstadt, A., Singh, A., & Bowman, S. R. (2019) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00290 · Cited by 1,215
Assessing the Ability of LSTMs to Learn Syntax-Sensitive Dependencies
Linzen, T., Emmanuel Dupoux, A., & Goldberg, Y. (2016) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00115 · Cited by 820
Self-citationAgreement attraction in comprehension: Representations and processes
WAGERS, M. W., Lau, E. F., & Phillips, C. (2009) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.04.002 · Cited by 639
Bock, K., & Miller, C. (1991) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(91)90003-7 · Cited by 558
Colorless Green Recurrent Networks Dream Hierarchically
Gulordava, K., Bojanowski, P., Grave, É., Linzen, T., & Baroni, M. (2018) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1108 · Cited by 538
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Anastasia Giannakidou. 2011. Negative and positive polarity items: Variation, licensing, and composi- tionality. In Semantics: An international hand- book of natural language meaning, pages 1660- 1712. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
- Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 332
What Makes My Model Perplexed? A Linguistic Investigation on Neural Language Models Perplexity
Miaschi, A., Brunato⋄, D., Dell’Orletta⋄, F., & Venturi⋄, G. (2021) · Workshop on Knowledge Extraction and Integration for Deep Learning Architectures: Deep Learning Inside Out (DeeLIO) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.deelio-1.5 · Cited by 23
(2022) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.746 · Cited by 21
DEMETR: Diagnosing Evaluation Metrics for Translation
Karpinska, M., Raj, N., Thai, K., Song, Y., Gupta, A., & Iyyer, M. (2022) · Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.649 · Cited by 22
Scalable Syntax-Aware Language Models Using Knowledge Distillation
Kuncoro, A., Dyer, C., Rimell, L., Clark, S. C., & Blunsom, P. (2019) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1337 · Cited by 26
DirectProbe: Studying Representations without Classifiers
Zhou, Y., & Srikumar, V. (2021) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.401 · Cited by 24
Grammatical Analysis of Pretrained Sentence Encoders with Acceptability Judgments.Preprint
Warstadt, A., & Bowman, S. R. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 19
RuCoLA: Russian Corpus of Linguistic Acceptability
Mikhailov, V., Shamardina, T., Ryabinin, M., Pestova, A., Smurov, I., & Artemova, E. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.348 · Cited by 22
The Low-Dimensional Linear Geometry of Contextualized Word Representations
Hernandez, E. J., & Andreas, J. (2021) · Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.conll-1.7 · Cited by 32
Modeling rapid language learning by distilling Bayesian priors into artificial neural networks
McCoy, R. T., & Griffiths, T. L. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-59957-y · Cited by 50
Are Factuality Checkers Reliable? Adversarial Meta-evaluation of Factuality in Summarization
Chen, Y., Liu, P., & Qiu, X. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.179 · Cited by 21
What Don't RNN Language Models Learn About Filler-Gap Dependencies?
Chaves, R. P. (2020) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/f7yj-1n62 · Cited by 18
Effective Batching for Recurrent Neural Network Grammars
Noji, H., & Oseki, Y. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.380 · Cited by 19
Evaluating Document Coherence Modeling
Shen, A., Mistica, M., Salehi, B., Li, H., Baldwin, T., & Qi, J. (2021) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00388 · Cited by 22
Linguistic Analysis of Pretrained Sentence Encoders with Acceptability JudgmentsPreprint
Warstadt, A., & Bowman, S. R. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.03438 · Cited by 38
Schuster, S., & Linzen, T. (2022) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.naacl-main.71 · Cited by 18
Self-citationVisual Comparison of Language Model Adaptation
Sevastjanova, R., Cakmak, E., Ravfogel, S., Cotterell, R., & El‐Assady, M. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2022.3209458 · Cited by 17
Acceptability Judgements via Examining the Topology of Attention Maps
Cherniavskii, D., Tulchinskii, E., Mikhailov, V., Proskurina, I., Kushnareva, L., Artemova, E., Barannikov, S., Piontkovskaya, I., Piontkovski, D., & Burnaev, E. V. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-emnlp.7 · Cited by 21
Misra, K., Rayz, J. T., & Ettinger, A. (2023) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.eacl-main.213 · Cited by 32
Towards Zero-shot Language Modeling
Ponti, E. M., Vulić, I., Cotterell, R., Reichart, R., & Korhonen, A. (2019) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d19-1288 · Cited by 16
Higher-order Comparisons of Sentence Encoder Representations
vqc439, V., Kulmizev, A., Hill, F., Low, D. M., & Søgaard, A. (2019) · Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) · Cited by 16
McCoy, R. T., Min, J., & Linzen, T. (2020) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4110592 · Cited by 19
Self-citationLanguage and learning: the cognitive revolution at 60‐odd
Bolhuis, J. J., Crain, S., & Roberts, I. (2023) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.12936 · Cited by 19
How Reliable are Model Diagnostics?
Aribandi, V., Tay, Y., & Metzler, D. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL-IJCNLP 2021 · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.155 · Cited by 15
Explaining Contextualization in Language Models using Visual Analytics
Sevastjanova, R., Kalouli, A.-L., Beck, C., Schäfer, H., & El‐Assady, M. (2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.39 · Cited by 16
Liu, N. F., Lee, T., Jia, R., & Liang, P. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 17
The Rise of Thinking Machines: A Review of Artificial Intelligence in Contemporary Communication
Gholami, M. J., & Abdwani, T. A. R. A. (2024) · Journal of Business Communication & Technology · doi:10.56632/bct.2024.3103 · Cited by 19
Mathematical Structure of Syntactic Merge
Marcolli, M., Chomsky, N., & Berwick, R. C. (2025) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/15811.001.0001 · Cited by 27
Noji, H., & Takamura, H. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.309 · Cited by 18
The Non-native Speaker Aspect: Indian English in Social Media
Sarkar, R., Mahinder, S., & KhudaBukhsh, A. R. (2020) · Workshop on Noisy User-generated Text (W-NUT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.wnut-1.9 · Cited by 14
Schrödinger's tree—On syntax and neural language models
Kulmizev, A., & Nivre, J. (2022) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2022.796788 · Cited by 20
Data-driven Cross-lingual Syntax: An Agreement Study with Massively Multilingual Models
de Varda, A. G., & Marelli, M. (2023) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00472 · Cited by 19
Sensitivity as a Complexity Measure for Sequence Classification Tasks
Hahn, M., Jurafsky, D., & Futrell, R. (2021) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00403 · Cited by 16
Huang, K., Arehalli, S., Kugemoto, M., Muxica, C., Prasad, G., Dillon, B., & Linzen, T. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/z38u6 · Cited by 14
Self-citationWilson, M., Petty, J., & Frank, R. (2023) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00608 · Cited by 14
Sevastjanova, R., Kalouli, A.-L., Beck, C., Hauptmann, H., & El‐Assady, M. (2022) · Computer Graphics Forum · doi:10.1111/cgf.14541 · Cited by 18
Wang, J., Yan, J., Gu, A., & Rush, A. M. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.5 · Cited by 57
Simple syntactic rules through rapid synaptic changesPreprint
Sun, L., & Manohar, S. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.12.21.572018 · Cited by 13
Representation biases in sentence transformers
Nikolaev, D., & Padó, S. (2023) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.eacl-main.268 · Cited by 26
Study on BERT Model for Hate Speech Detection
Gupta, S., Lakra, S., & Kaur, M. (2020) · International Conference on Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA) · doi:10.1109/iceca49313.2020.9297560 · Cited by 13
Coopmans, C. W., de Hoop, H., Kaushik, K., Peter Hagoort, A., & Martin, A. E. (2021) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2021.1980595 · Cited by 14
How Suitable Are Subword Segmentation Strategies for Translating Non-Concatenative Morphology?
Amrhein, C., & Sennrich, R. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.60 · Cited by 12
Wilcox, E., Qian, P., Futrell, R., Kohita, R., Lévy, R., & Ballesteros, M. (2020) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.375 · Cited by 15
Neural Language Models as Psycholinguistic Subjects: Representations of Syntactic StatePreprint
Futrell, R., Wilcox, E., Morita, T., Qian, P., Ballesteros, M., & Lévy, R. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.03260 · Cited by 46
Does BERT agree? Evaluating knowledge of structure dependence through agreement relationsPreprint
Bacon, G., & Regier, T. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1908.09892 · Cited by 19
This is a BERT. Now there are several of them. Can they generalize to novel words?
Haley, C. (2020) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.blackboxnlp-1.31 · Cited by 11
A Multilingual Benchmark for Probing Negation-Awareness with Minimal Pairs
Hartmann, M., de Lhoneux, M., Hershcovich, D., Kementchedjhieva, Y., Nielsen, L., Qiu, C., & Søgaard, A. (2021) · Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.conll-1.19 · Cited by 12
Li, B., Wisniewski, G., & Crabbé, B. (2023) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00531 · Cited by 12
Mueller, A., & Linzen, T. (2023) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.629 · Cited by 20
Self-citationProbing GPT-3’s Linguistic Knowledge on Semantic Tasks
Zhang, L., Wang, M., Chen, L., & Zhang, W. (2022) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.blackboxnlp-1.24 · Cited by 13
Sergeeva, E., Zhu, H., Tahmasebi, A. M., & Szolovits, P. (2019) · International Workshop on Health Text Mining and Information Analysis (LOUHI) · doi:10.18653/v1/d19-6221 · Cited by 11
Costa, J. K. D., & Chaves, R. P. (2020) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/3sb6-4g20 · Cited by 11
A Closer Look at the Performance of Neural Language Models on Reflexive Anaphor Licensing
Hu, J., Chen, S. Y., & Lévy, R. (2020) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/67qw-mf84 · Cited by 9
Transformers Generalize LinearlyPreprint
Petty, J., & Frank, R. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.12036 · Cited by 21
Loyola, P., Marrese-Taylor, E., & Hoyos-Idrobo, A. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.102 · Cited by 9
Bigger is not always better: The importance of human-scale language modeling for psycholinguistics
Wilcox, E. G., Hu, M. Y., Mueller, A., Warstadt, A., Choshen, L., Zhuang, C., Williams, A., Cotterell, R., & Linzen, T. (2025) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2025.104650 · Cited by 9
Self-citationJBLiMP: Japanese Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs
Someya, T., & Oseki, Y. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-eacl.117 · Cited by 9
Overestimation of Syntactic Representation in Neural Language Models
Kodner, J., & Gupta, N. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.160 · Cited by 13
Do Grammatical Error Correction Models Realize Grammatical Generalization?
Mita, M., & Yanaka, H. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.399 · Cited by 8
Lepori, M. A., Linzen, T., & McCoy, R. T. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.303 · Cited by 10
Self-citationWord Frequency Does Not Predict Grammatical Knowledge in Language Models
Yu, C., Sie, R., Tedeschi, N., & Bergen, L. (2020) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.331 · Cited by 10
Is Incoherence Surprising? Targeted Evaluation of Coherence Prediction from Language Models
Beyer, A., Loáiciga, S., & Schlangen, D. (2021) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.328 · Cited by 12
SyGNS: A Systematic Generalization Testbed Based on Natural Language Semantics
Yanaka, H., Mineshima, K., & Inui, K. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.10 · Cited by 10
Data-driven Model Generalizability in Crosslinguistic Low-resource Morphological Segmentation
Liu, Z., & Prud’hommeaux, E. T. (2022) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00467 · Cited by 9
What can linguistics and deep learning contribute to each other?Preprint
Linzen, T. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1809.04179 · Cited by 8
Self-citationEvaluating Neural Language Models as Cognitive Models of Language Acquisition
Martínez, H. J. V., Heuser, A., Yang, C. D., & Kodner, J. (2023) · GenBench Workshop on Generalisation (Benchmarking) in NLP (GenBench) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.genbench-1.4 · Cited by 10
diagNNose: A Library for Neural Activation Analysis
Jumelet, J. (2020) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.blackboxnlp-1.32 · Cited by 6
Representation of Constituents in Neural Language Models: Coordination Phrase as a Case Study
An, A., Qian, P., Wilcox, E., & Lévy, R. (2019) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d19-1287 · Cited by 10
A multilabel approach to morphosyntactic probing
Shapiro, N. T., Paullada, A., & Steinert‐Threlkeld, S. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.382 · Cited by 10
Coupling Artificial Neurons in BERT and Biological Neurons in the Human Brain
Liu, X., Zhou, M., Shi, G., Du, Y., Zhao, L., Wu, Z., Liu, D., Liu, T., & Hu, X. (2023) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v37i7.26068 · Cited by 8
Assessing Grammatical Correctness in Language Learning
Katinskaia, A., & Yangarber, R. (2021) · Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja · Cited by 7
The acceptability and validity of AI-generated psycholinguistic stimuli
Alzahrani, A. A. (2025) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e42083 · Cited by 6
Probing for Incremental Parse States in Autoregressive Language Models
Eisape, T., Gangireddy, V., Lévy, R., & Kim, Y. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-emnlp.203 · Cited by 11
Kunz, J. (2024) · Linköping studies in science and technology. Dissertations · doi:10.3384/9789180754712 · Cited by 7
Characterizing English Preposing in PP constructions
Potts, C. (2024) · Journal of Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0022226724000227 · Cited by 9
Multiple Admissibility: Judging Grammaticality using Unlabeled Data in Language Learning
Katinskaia, A., & Ivanova, S. (2019) · Workshop on Balto-Slavic Natural Language Processing (BSNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/w19-3702 · Cited by 6
Are Transformers a Modern Version of ELIZA? Observations on French Object Verb Agreement
Li, B., Wisniewski, G., & Crabbé, B. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.377 · Cited by 6
Language model acceptability judgements are not always robust to context
Sinha, K., Gauthier, J., Mueller, A., Misra, K., Fuentes, K., Lévy, R., & Williams, A. (2023) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.333 · Cited by 12
Beyond the limitations of any imaginable mechanism: Large language models and psycholinguistics
Houghton, C. J., Kazanina, N., & Sukumaran, P. (2023) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x23001693 · Cited by 12
Say Anything: Automatic Semantic Infelicity Detection in L2 English Indefinite Pronouns
Rabinovich, E., Watson, J., Beekhuizen, B., & Stevenson, S. (2019) · Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.18653/v1/k19-1008 · Cited by 5
Evaluating the Morphosyntactic Well-formedness of Generated Texts
Pratapa, A., Anastasopoulos, A., Rijhwani, S., Chaudhary, A., Mortensen, D. R., Neubig, G., & Tsvetkov, Y. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.570 · Cited by 5
BERT-Proof Syntactic Structures: Investigating Errors in Discontinuous Constituency Parsing
Coavoux, M. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.288 · Cited by 7
Arous, I., Chehbouni, K., Cheng, Z., & Dossou, B. F. P. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-8440-0_85-1 · Cited by 5
Finding Hierarchical Structure in Neural Stacks Using Unsupervised Parsing
Merrill, W., Khazan, L., Amsel, N., Hao, Y., Mendelsohn, S., & Frank, R. (2019) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/w19-4823 · Cited by 6
Fine-grained Interpretation and Causation Analysis in Deep NLP Models
Sajjad, H., Kokhlikyan, N., Dalvi, F., & Durrani, N. (2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-tutorials.2 · Cited by 5
Shin, G., & Mun, S. (2023) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/desc.13405 · Cited by 7
(2022) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.conll-1.8 · Cited by 5
Self-citationCan Language Models Be Tricked by Language Illusions? Easier with Syntax, Harder with Semantics
Zhang, Y., Gibson, E. A. F., & Davis, F. (2023) · Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.conll-1.1 · Cited by 8
Filtered Corpus Training (FiCT) Shows that Language Models Can Generalize from Indirect Evidence
Patil, A., Jumelet, J., Chiu, Y. Y., Lapastora, A., Shen, P. S., Wang, L., Willrich, C., & Steinert‐Threlkeld, S. (2024) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00720 · Cited by 16
Grammaticality and Language Modelling
Niu, J., & Penn, G. (2020) · Workshop on Evaluation and Comparison of NLP Systems (Eval4NLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.eval4nlp-1.11 · Cited by 6
Explicitly Modeling Syntax in Language Models with Incremental Parsing and a Dynamic Oracle
Shen, Y., Tan, S., Sordoni, A., Reddy, S., & Courville, A. C. (2021) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.132 · Cited by 8
Yanaka, H., & Mineshima, K. (2021) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.blackboxnlp-1.26 · Cited by 7
Assessing the Benchmarking Capacity of Machine Reading Comprehension DatasetsPreprint
Sugawara, S., Stenetorp, P., Inui, K., & Aizawa, A. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1911.09241 · Cited by 5
How Context Affects Language Models' Factual Predictions
Fabio Petroni, P. L. (2020) · Automated Knowledge Base Construction (AKBC) · doi:10.24432/c5201w · Cited by 4
“A variety of “probes” have been developed to analyse the syntactic structures, such as syntax trees [Marvin and Linzen, 2018, Hewitt and Manning, 2019, Vig and Belinkov, 2019], negative polarity items [Warstadt and Bowman, 2019, Warstadt et al., 2019], semantic fragments [Richardson et al., 2019],…”
BackgroundAssisted Process Knowledge Graph Building Using Pre-trained Language Models
Bellan, P., Dragoni, M., & Ghidini, C. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-27181-6_5 · Cited by 5
On the Transformation of Latent Space in Fine-Tuned NLP Models
Durrani, N., Sajjad, H., Dalvi, F., & Alam, F. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.97 · Cited by 10
Weissweiler, L., Hofmann, V., Köksal, A., & Schütze, H. (2023) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2023.1225791 · Cited by 4
Verb Conjugation in Transformers Is Determined by Linear Encodings of Subject Number
Hao, S., & Linzen, T. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.300 · Cited by 7
Self-citationShades of zero: Distinguishing impossibility from inconceivability
Hu, J., Sosa, F., & Ullman, T. D. (2025) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2025.104640 · Cited by 8
Multilingual capabilities of GPT: A study of structural ambiguity
Yoo, M. H., Kim, J.-S., & Song, S. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0326943 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Marvin, R., & Linzen, T.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Linzen, Tal
- ORCID
- Linzen, Tal
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
- Published
- 2018
- Pages
- 1192-1202
- OpenAlex
- W2888922637
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 20.41
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- grammaticality judgment, subject-verb agreement, negative polarity items, LSTM language models, human vs machine performance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review