This study examines how large language models (LLMs) resolve relative clause (RC) attachment ambiguities and compares their performance to human sentence processing. Focusing on two linguistic factors, namely the length of RCs and the syntactic position of complex determiner phrases (DPs), we assess whether LLMs can achieve human-like interpretations amid the complexities of language. In this study, we evaluated several LLMs, including Claude, Gemini and Llama, in multiple languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Japanese, and Korean. While these models performed well in Indo-European languages (English, Spanish, French, and German), they encountered difficulties in Asian languages (Japanese and Korean), often defaulting to incorrect English translations. The findings underscore the variability in LLMs' handling of linguistic ambiguities and highlight the need for model improvements, particularly for non-European languages. This research informs future enhancements in LLM design to improve accuracy and human-like processing in diverse linguistic environments.

Recent cognitive modeling studies have reported that larger language models (LMs) exhibit a poorer fit to human reading behavior, leading to claims of their cognitive implausibility. In this paper, we revisit this argument through the lens of mechanistic interpretability and argue that prior conclusions were skewed by an exclusive focus on the final layers of LMs. Our analysis reveals that next-word probabilities derived from internal layers of larger LMs align with human sentence processing data as well as, or better than, those from smaller LMs. This alignment holds consistently across behavioral (self-paced reading times, gaze durations, MAZE task processing times) and neurophysiological (N400 brain potentials) measures, challenging earlier mixed results and suggesting that the cognitive plausibility of larger LMs has been underestimated. Furthermore, we first identify an intriguing relationship between LM layers and human measures: earlier layers correspond more closely with fast gaze durations, while later layers better align with relatively slower signals such as N400 potentials and MAZE processing times. Our work opens new avenues for interdisciplinary research at the intersection of mechanistic interpretability and cognitive modeling.

In reading garden-path sentences, people must resolve competing interpretations, though initial misinterpretations can linger despite reanalysis. This study examines the role of inhibitory control (IC) in managing these misinterpretations among Chinese-English bilinguals. Using self-paced reading tasks, we investigated how IC influences recovery from garden-path sentences in Chinese (L1) and its interaction with language proficiency during English (L2) processing. Results indicate that IC does not affect garden-path recovery in Chinese, suggesting reliance on semantic context may reduce the need for IC. In contrast, findings for English L2 learners reveal a complex relationship between language proficiency and IC: Participants with low L2 proficiency but high IC showed lingering misinterpretations, while those with high proficiency exhibited none. These results support and extend the Model of Cognitive Control (Ness et al., 2023). Moreover, our comparison of three Stroop task versions identifies L1 colour-word Stroop task as the preferred measure of IC in bilingual research.

Recent psycholinguistic research has compared human reading times to surprisal estimates from language models to study the factors shaping human sentence processing difficulty. Previous studies have shown a strong fit between surprisal values from Transformers and reading times. However, standard Transformers work with a lossless representation of the entire previous linguistic context, unlike models of human language processing that include memory decay. To bridge this gap, this paper evaluates a modification of the Transformer model that uses ALiBi (Press et al., 2022), a recency bias added to attention scores. Surprisal estimates with ALiBi show an improved fit to human reading times compared to a standard Transformer baseline. A subsequent analysis of attention heads suggests that ALiBi's mixture of slopes -- which determine the rate of memory decay in each attention head -- may play a role in the improvement by helping models with ALiBi to track different kinds of linguistic dependencies.

Models of eye-movement control during reading, developed largely within psychology, usually focus on visual, attentional, lexical, and motor processes but neglect post-lexical language processing; by contrast, models of sentence comprehension processes, developed largely within psycholinguistics, generally focus only on post-lexical language processes. We present a model that combines these two research threads, by integrating eye-movement control and sentence processing. Developing such an integrated model is extremely challenging and computationally demanding, but such an integration is an important step toward complete mathematical models of natural language comprehension in reading. We combine the SWIFT model of eye-movement control (Seelig et al., 2020, doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2019.102313) with key components of the Lewis and Vasishth sentence processing model (Lewis & Vasishth, 2005, doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25). This integration becomes possible, for the first time, due in part to recent advances in successful parameter identification in dynamical models, which allows us to investigate profile log-likelihoods for individual model parameters. We present a fully implemented proof-of-concept model demonstrating how such an integrated model can be achieved; our approach includes Bayesian model inference with Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling as a key computational tool. The integrated Sentence-Processing and Eye-Movement Activation-Coupled Model (SEAM) can successfully reproduce eye movement patterns that arise due to similarity-based interference in reading. To our knowledge, this is the first-ever integration of a complete process model of eye-movement control with linguistic dependency completion processes in sentence comprehension. In future work, this proof of concept model will need to be evaluated using a comprehensive set of benchmark data.

Narayanan and Jurafsky (1998) proposed that human language compre- hension can be modeled by treating human comprehenders as Bayesian reasoners, and modeling the comprehension process with Bayesian de- cision trees. In this paper we extend the Narayanan and Jurafsky model to make further predictions about reading time given the probability of difference parses or interpretations, and test the model against reading time data from a psycholinguistic experiment.

Language models (LMs) have been used in cognitive modeling as well as engineering studies -- they compute information-theoretic complexity metrics that simulate humans' cognitive load during reading. This study highlights a limitation of modern neural LMs as the model of choice for this purpose: there is a discrepancy between their context access capacities and that of humans. Our results showed that constraining the LMs' context access improved their simulation of human reading behavior. We also showed that LM-human gaps in context access were associated with specific syntactic constructions; incorporating syntactic biases into LMs' context access might enhance their cognitive plausibility.

Language comprehension in humans is significantly constrained by memory, yet rapid, highly incremental, and capable of utilizing a wide range of contextual information to resolve ambiguity and form expectations about future input. In contrast, most of the leading psycholinguistic models and fielded algorithms for natural language parsing are non-incremental, have run time superlinear in input length, and/or enforce structural locality constraints on probabilistic dependencies between events. We present a new limited-memory model of sentence comprehension which involves an adaptation of the particle filter, a sequential Monte Carlo method, to the problem of incremental parsing. We show that this model can reproduce classic results in online sentence comprehension, and that it naturally provides the first rational account of an outstanding problem in psycholinguistics, in which the preferred alternative in a syntactic ambiguity seems to grow more attractive over time even in the absence of strong disambiguating information.

Narayanan and Jurafsky (1998) proposed that human language comprehension can be modeled by treating human comprehenders as Bayesian reasoners, and modeling the comprehension process with Bayesian decision trees. In this paper we extend the Narayanan and Jurafsky model to make further predictions about reading time given the probability of difference parses or interpretations, and test the model against reading time data from a psycholinguistic experiment.

Narayanan and Jurafsky (1998) proposed that human language comprehension can be modeled by treating human comprehenders as Bayesian reasoners, and modeling the comprehension process with Bayesian decision trees. In this paper we extend the Narayanan and Jurafsky model to make further predictions about reading time given the probability of difference parses or interpretations, and test the model against reading time data from a psycholinguistic experiment.