Who Relies More on World Knowledge and Bias for Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution: Humans or LLMs?
By: So Young Lee , Russell Scheinberg , Amber Shore and more
Potential Business Impact:
Computers struggle to understand tricky sentences.
This study explores how recent large language models (LLMs) navigate relative clause attachment {ambiguity} and use world knowledge biases for disambiguation in six typologically diverse languages: English, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Russian, and Spanish. We describe the process of creating a novel dataset -- MultiWho -- for fine-grained evaluation of relative clause attachment preferences in ambiguous and unambiguous contexts. Our experiments with three LLMs indicate that, contrary to humans, LLMs consistently exhibit a preference for local attachment, displaying limited responsiveness to syntactic variations or language-specific attachment patterns. Although LLMs performed well in unambiguous cases, they rigidly prioritized world knowledge biases, lacking the flexibility of human language processing. These findings highlight the need for more diverse, pragmatically nuanced multilingual training to improve LLMs' handling of complex structures and human-like comprehension.
Similar Papers
Multilingual Relative Clause Attachment Ambiguity Resolution in Large Language Models
Computation and Language
Computers understand sentences better, but not all languages.
Investigating Syntactic Biases in Multilingual Transformers with RC Attachment Ambiguities in Italian and English
Computation and Language
Computers don't understand sentences like people do.
It Depends: Resolving Referential Ambiguity in Minimal Contexts with Commonsense Knowledge
Computation and Language
Helps computers understand confusing words in chats.