Does Vision Accelerate Hierarchical Generalization in Neural Language Learners?

Tatsuki Kuribayashi, Timothy Baldwin
2/1/2023
cs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 2 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

Neural language models (LMs) are arguably less data-efficient than humans from a language acquisition perspective. One fundamental question is why this human-LM gap arises. This study explores the advantage of grounded language acquisition, specifically the impact of visual information -- which humans can usually rely on but LMs largely do not have access to during language acquisition -- on syntactic generalization in LMs. Our experiments, following the poverty of stimulus paradigm under two scenarios (using artificial vs. naturalistic images), demonstrate that if the alignments between the linguistic and visual components are clear in the input, access to vision data does help with the syntactic generalization of LMs, but if not, visual input does not help. This highlights the need for additional biases or signals, such as mutual gaze, to enhance cross-modal alignment and enable efficient syntactic generalization in multimodal LMs.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 2 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{kuribayashi2023does,
  title  = {Does Vision Accelerate Hierarchical Generalization in Neural Language Learners?},
  author = {Tatsuki Kuribayashi and Timothy Baldwin},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2302.00667},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.00667v3}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2302.00667.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2302.00667)

Discussion