Abstract
We propose an alternate approach to quantifying how well language models learn natural language: we ask how well they match the statistical tendencies of natural language. To answer this question, we analyze whether text generated from language models exhibits the statistical tendencies present in the human-generated text on which they were trained. We provide a framework--paired with significance tests--for evaluating the fit of language models to certain statistical tendencies of natural language. We find that neural language models appear to learn only a subset of the statistical tendencies considered, but align much more closely with empirical trends than theoretical laws (when present). Further, the fit to different distributions is dependent on both model architecture and generation strategy. As concrete examples, text generated under the nucleus sampling scheme adheres more closely to the type--token relationship of natural language than text produced using standard ancestral sampling; text from LSTMs reflects the natural language distributions over length, stopwords, and symbols suprisingly well.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.00085
