Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Learning Which Features Matter: RoBERTa Acquires a Preference for Linguistic Generalizations (Eventually)

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 2010.05358 v1 pith:PIZSYZ2R submitted 2020-10-11 cs.CL

Learning Which Features Matter: RoBERTa Acquires a Preference for Linguistic Generalizations (Eventually)

classification cs.CL
keywords linguisticfeatureslearnmodelsdatapretraininggeneralizationsduring
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

One reason pretraining on self-supervised linguistic tasks is effective is that it teaches models features that are helpful for language understanding. However, we want pretrained models to learn not only to represent linguistic features, but also to use those features preferentially during fine-turning. With this goal in mind, we introduce a new English-language diagnostic set called MSGS (the Mixed Signals Generalization Set), which consists of 20 ambiguous binary classification tasks that we use to test whether a pretrained model prefers linguistic or surface generalizations during fine-tuning. We pretrain RoBERTa models from scratch on quantities of data ranging from 1M to 1B words and compare their performance on MSGS to the publicly available RoBERTa-base. We find that models can learn to represent linguistic features with little pretraining data, but require far more data to learn to prefer linguistic generalizations over surface ones. Eventually, with about 30B words of pretraining data, RoBERTa-base does demonstrate a linguistic bias with some regularity. We conclude that while self-supervised pretraining is an effective way to learn helpful inductive biases, there is likely room to improve the rate at which models learn which features matter.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Linguistic Productivity in Large Language Models: Models Coerce, but do not Preempt

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Larger LLMs reproduce constructional productivity via entrenchment in coercion cases with nonce words but fail to use statistical preemption to avoid overgeneralizing semantically plausible but unobserved patterns.