Information Integration in Large Language Models is Gated by Linguistic Structural Markers
Wei Liu, Nai Ding
Abstract
Language comprehension relies on integrating information across both local words and broader context. We propose a method to quantify the information integration window of large language models (LLMs) and examine how sentence and clause boundaries constrain this window. Specifically, LLMs are required to predict a target word based on either a local window (local prediction) or the full context (global prediction), and we use Jensen-Shannon (JS) divergence to measure the information loss from relying solely on the local window, termed the local-prediction deficit. Results show that integration windows of both humans and LLMs are strongly modulated by sentence boundaries, and predictions primarily rely on words within the same sentence or clause: The localprediction deficit follows a power-law decay as the window length increases and drops sharply at the sentence boundary. This boundary effect is primarily attributed to linguistic structural markers, e.g., punctuation, rather than implicit syntactic or semantic cues. Together, these results indicate that LLMs rely on explicit structural cues to guide their information integration strategy.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 08e36182-af86-4dcf-aae3-2da173a0a4e4Builds on7
- Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention SinksGuangxuan Xiao, Yuandong Tian, Beidi Chen, Song Han et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,714 citations
- Native Sparse Attention: Hardware-Aligned and Natively Trainable Sparse AttentionJingyang Yuan, Huazuo Gao, Damai Dai, Junyu Luo et al.ACL 2025 · 334 citations
- Perturbed Masking: Parameter-free Probing for Analyzing and Interpreting BERTZhiyong Wu, Yun Chen, Ben Kao, Qun LiuACL 2020 · 158 citations
- LooGLE: Can Long-Context Language Models Understand Long Contexts?Jiaqi Li, Mengmeng Wang, Zilong Zheng, Muhan ZhangACL 2024 · 32 citations
- Unsupervised Parsing via Constituency TestsSteven Cao, Nikita Kitaev, Dan KleinEMNLP 2020 · 25 citations
Related papers
- Large language models transition from integrating across position-yoked, exponential windows to structure-yoked, power-law windowsDavid Skrill, Samuel Norman-HaignereNeurIPS 2023 · 7 citations
- Prompting is not a substitute for probability measurements in large language modelsJennifer Hu, Roger LevyEMNLP 2023 · 31 citations
- Comparing human and language models sentence processing difficulties on complex structuresSamuel Joseph Amouyal, Aya Meltzer-Asscher, Jonathan BerantACL 2026 · 1 citation
- From Tokens to Thoughts: How LLMs and Humans Trade Compression for MeaningChen Shani, Liron Soffer, Dan Jurafsky, Yann LeCun et al.ICLR 2026 · 38 citations
- Clozing the Gap: Exploring Why Language Model Surprisal Outperforms Cloze SurprisalSathvik Nair, Byung-Doh OhACL 2026 · 1 citation
