Language models demonstrate the good-enough processing seen in humans

Comparative illusions, also called Escher sentences, are comparative sentences that appear acceptable but challenge the boundaries of comprehension. Escher sentences, illusions that are the subject of this paper, require structural reinterpretation to resolve their anomalies, making them ideal phenomena for probing the mechanisms of language processing in humans and machines. Using human behavior as a benchmark for large language models' (LLM) performance, we assessed LLMs' behavior with three methods: prompt, probability measurement, and lexical disturbance. Our results indicate that LLMs, when prompted, display "human-like'' behavior, LLMs struggled to reliably rank surprisals, and they were sensitive to both lexical and syntactic cues in Eschers. These results indicate that LLMs seem to manifest the good-enough processing seen in human cognition. Understanding and narrowing this discrepancy could result in AI systems that are more in tune with human reasoning and more interpretable, ultimately enhancing our grasp of sentence processing in humans and machines.

Publication Details

Journal
eScholarship (California Digital Library)
Published
2025-01-01
Primary Topic
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Language models demonstrate the good-enough processing seen in humans

eScholarship (California Digital Library)
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
article

Language models demonstrate the good-enough processing seen in humans

article en

Abstract

Comparative illusions, also called Escher sentences, are comparative sentences that appear acceptable but challenge the boundaries of comprehension. Escher sentences, illusions that are the subject of this paper, require structural reinterpretation to resolve their anomalies, making them ideal phenomena for probing the mechanisms of language processing in humans and machines. Using human behavior as a benchmark for large language models' (LLM) performance, we assessed LLMs' behavior with three methods: prompt, probability measurement, and lexical disturbance. Our results indicate that LLMs, when prompted, display "human-like'' behavior, LLMs struggled to reliably rank surprisals, and they were sensitive to both lexical and syntactic cues in Eschers. These results indicate that LLMs seem to manifest the good-enough processing seen in human cognition. Understanding and narrowing this discrepancy could result in AI systems that are more in tune with human reasoning and more interpretable, ultimately enhancing our grasp of sentence processing in humans and machines.

eScholarship (California Digital Library)
Purdue University, College of Liberal Arts, Purdue University
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
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.

Language models demonstrate the good-enough processing seen in humans · eScholarship (California Digital Library) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS