about
Do We Need Neural Models to Explain Human Judgments of Acceptability? (arxiv.org)
1 point by sel1 on Sep 21, 2019 | hide | past | pdf | discuss on HN

In plain words: To judge how natural a sentence sounds, the study compared neural models with simple cues like misspellings and word order, plus a word-sequence probability model, on non-native English essays. Counting misspellings let it match the neural one and beat the average non-expert native speaker.

Abstract

Native speakers can judge whether a sentence is an acceptable instance of their language. Acceptability provides a means of evaluating whether computational language models are processing language in a human-like manner. We test the ability of computational language models, simple language features, and word embeddings to predict native English speakers judgments of acceptability on English-language essays written by non-native speakers. We find that much of the sentence acceptability variance can be captured by a combination of features including misspellings, word order, and word similarity (Pearson's r = 0.494). While predictive neural models fit acceptability judgments well (r = 0.527), we find that a 4-gram model with statistical smoothing is just as good (r = 0.528). Thanks to incorporating a count of misspellings, our 4-gram model surpasses both the previous unsupervised state-of-the art (Lau et al., 2015; r = 0.472), and the average non-expert native speaker (r = 0.46). Our results demonstrate that acceptability is well captured by n-gram statistics and simple language features.

Wang Jing, M. A. Kelly, David Reitter
arXiv:1909.08663 · cs.CL, cs.AI, cs.LG · submitted Sep 18, 2019 · updated Oct 9, 2019
abstract · pdf · html · 10 pages (8 pages + 2 pages of references), 1 figure, 7 tables

add comment on HN