Aug 2026· Journal of Intelligence· Vol 14· 0 citations· 35 references
Medicine
Abstract
Surprisal, the negative log probability of a word given its context, is the dominant computational metric for quantifying reading difficulty and a common item difficulty estimator in reading research. Yet how the language model family, surprisal granularity, and corpus type jointly shape the surprisal–reading time link remains unclear. We conducted a secondary analysis of two public English reading corpora: the Natural Stories Corpus (self-paced reading, 181 readers) and the Provo Corpus (eye tracking with cloze norms). Surprisal was computed from GPT 2 (Small, XL), Llama 2 (7B, 13B), and Llama 3 (8B), together with a 5-gram baseline and human cloze norms. Linear mixed-effects models tested the baseline contribution of neural surprisal, inverse scaling within model families, word-level versus sub-word aggregation, and the linking function shape. Neural surprisal contributed reliable variance above a strong baseline in both corpora. A clear inverse scaling pattern emerged: GPT 2 Small produced the largest fit improvements, exceeding GPT 2 XL, Llama 2 13B, and Llama 3 8B. Word-level aggregation outperformed sub-word aggregation, especially for measures of early lexical access. Non-parametric analyses supported an approximately linear linking function, and cloze norms carried information not fully captured by neural surprisal. These findings show that larger models are not automatically better cognitive models of reading and that surprisal granularity is not a neutral analytic choice.
Surprisal, the negative log-probability a language model assigns to a word given its preceding context, reliably predicts adult reading times. Does it contribute as much to explaining when children acquire individual words? Frequency reflects a learner's cumulative exposure to a word, whereas surprisal reflects how pre...
The question of whether the relationship between a word's predictability and its processing time is linear or logarithmic is of substantial theoretical importance, as it arbitrates between theories of the predictability effect (preactivation vs. surprisal) and has implications for sentence processing generally. While s...
Ryan Buggy, Stephanie Cho, Cory Shain et al.· Journal of Experimental Psyc...· 1 citation
Theories of predictive coding propose that perception is the process of inferring the causes of our sensory input by comparing that input with predictions derived from our internal models of the world. Such predictive processes are thought to play a central role in language comprehension, however, robust neurophysiolog...
Encoding models offer a principled framework for linking computational representations of language to neural activity, but most electroencephalography (EEG) evidence for brain–language alignment comes from tightly controlled, word-by-word reading paradigms. Whether such alignment is detectable during naturalistic readi...
When readers encounter an English it-extraposition structure (e.g., It is obvious that the minister resigned), two fundamentally different processing mechanisms could guide the resolution of the cataphoric dependency. The Selective Attention Hypothesis (SAH) holds that expletive it concentrates attentional resources on...
Muwahib Mohammed, Abdul Salam, Al-Shabouki· Al-Farooq Journal of Science...· 0 citations
It is argued that modelling ERP patterns offers fine-grained analysis of the cognitive plausibility of various LMs during reading, and that only surprisal potentially correlates with language-processing ERPs, especially for open-class words with high semantic content.
B. M. Quach, B. Nguyen, C. Gurrin et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.