Probing for the Usage of Grammatical Number
Karim Lasri, Tiago Pimentel, Alessandro Lenci, Thierry Poibeau, Ryan Cotterell
Abstract
A central quest of probing is to uncover how pre-trained models encode a linguistic property within their representations. An encoding, however, might be spurious—i.e., the model might not rely on it when making predictions. In this paper, we try to find an encoding that the model actually uses, introducing a usage-based probing setup. We first choose a behavioral task which cannot be solved without using the linguistic property. Then, we attempt to remove the property by intervening on the model’s representations. We contend that, if an encoding is used by the model, its removal should harm the performance on the chosen behavioral task. As a case study, we focus on how BERT encodes grammatical number, and on how it uses this encoding to solve the number agreement task. Experimentally, we find that BERT relies on a linear encoding of grammatical number to produce the correct behavioral output. We also find that BERT uses a separate encoding of grammatical number for nouns and verbs. Finally, we identify in which layers information about grammatical number is transferred from a noun to its head verb.
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 c996fe93-6e5a-4004-b909-4dbdb515c888Cited by top-tier papers17
- ReFT: Representation Finetuning for Language ModelsZhengxuan Wu, Aryaman Arora, Zheng Wang, Atticus Geiger et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 233 citations
- LLM Circuit Analyses Are Consistent Across Training and ScaleCurt Tigges, Michael Hanna, Qinan Yu, Stella BidermanNeurIPS 2024 · 71 citations
- The Non-Linear Representation Dilemma: Is Causal Abstraction Enough for Mechanistic Interpretability?Denis Sutter, Julian Minder, Thomas Hofmann, Tiago PimentelNeurIPS 2025 · 30 citations
- Gaussian Process Probes (GPP) for Uncertainty-Aware ProbingZi Wang, Alexander Ku, Jason Baldridge, Tom Griffiths et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 17 citations
- Latent Planning Emerges with ScaleMichael Hanna, Emmanuel AmeisenICLR 2026 · 5 citations
Builds on17
- Investigating Gender Bias in Language Models Using Causal Mediation AnalysisJesse Vig, Sebastian Gehrmann, Yonatan Belinkov, Sharon Qian et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 851 citations
- A Theory of Usable Information under Computational ConstraintsYilun Xu, Shengjia Zhao, Jiaming Song, Russell Stewart et al.ICLR 2020 · 211 citations
- Masked Language Modeling and the Distributional Hypothesis: Order Word Matters Pre-training for LittleKoustuv Sinha, Robin Jia, Dieuwke Hupkes, Joelle Pineau et al.EMNLP 2021 · 177 citations
- Linear Adversarial Concept ErasureShauli Ravfogel, Michael Twiton, Yoav Goldberg, Ryan CotterellICML 2022 · 89 citations
- Predicting Inductive Biases of Pre-Trained ModelsCharles Lovering, Rohan Jha, Tal Linzen, Ellie PavlickICLR 2021 · 70 citations
Related papers
- A matter of framing: The impact of linguistic formalism on probing resultsIlia Kuznetsov, Iryna GurevychEMNLP 2020 · 1 citation
- Exploring the Role of BERT Token Representations to Explain Sentence Probing ResultsHosein Mohebbi, Ali Modarressi, Mohammad Taher PilehvarEMNLP 2021 · 14 citations
- Frequency Effects on Syntactic Rule Learning in TransformersJason Wei, Dan Garrette, Tal Linzen, Ellie PavlickEMNLP 2021 · 40 citations
- Probing as Quantifying Inductive BiasAlexander Immer, Lucas Torroba Hennigen, Vincent Fortuin, Ryan CotterellACL 2022
- Information-Theoretic Probing for Linguistic StructureTiago Pimentel, Josef Valvoda, Rowan Hall Maudslay, Ran Zmigrod et al.ACL 2020 · 21 citations
