Success and failure of compositional generalisation in distributional models of language

Are distributional learning mechanisms capable of complex linguistic inferences requiring compositional generalisation? This question has become contentious with the development of large language models, which mimic human language abilities in many ways, but which struggle with compositional generalisation. We investigated a set of qualitatively different distributional models (word co-occurrence models, graphical models, recurrent neural networks, and Transformers), by training them on a carefully controlled artificial language containing combinatorial dependencies involving multiple words, and then testing them on novel sequences containing distributionally overlapping combinatorial dependencies. In this work, we show that graphical network models and Transformers, but not co-occurrence space models and recurrent neural networks, were able to perform compositional generalisation. This work demonstrates that the kinds of distributional models that can perform compositional generalisation are those that can represent words both individually and as a part of the phrases in which they participate.

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28124452
Primary Topic
Natural Language Processing Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Success and failure of compositional generalisation in distributional models of language

Figshare
Natural Language Processing Techniques
article

Success and failure of compositional generalisation in distributional models of language

article en

Abstract

Are distributional learning mechanisms capable of complex linguistic inferences requiring compositional generalisation? This question has become contentious with the development of large language models, which mimic human language abilities in many ways, but which struggle with compositional generalisation. We investigated a set of qualitatively different distributional models (word co-occurrence models, graphical models, recurrent neural networks, and Transformers), by training them on a carefully controlled artificial language containing combinatorial dependencies involving multiple words, and then testing them on novel sequences containing distributionally overlapping combinatorial dependencies. In this work, we show that graphical network models and Transformers, but not co-occurrence space models and recurrent neural networks, were able to perform compositional generalisation. This work demonstrates that the kinds of distributional models that can perform compositional generalisation are those that can represent words both individually and as a part of the phrases in which they participate.

Figshare
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Natural Language Processing Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Success and failure of compositional generalisation in distributional models of language · Figshare (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS