ACL Findings2025
The Inverse Scaling Effect of Pre-Trained Language Model Surprisal Is Not Due to Data Leakage
Byung-Doh Oh, Hongao Zhu, William Schuler
Abstract
In psycholinguistic modeling, surprisal from larger pre-trained language models has been shown to be a poorer predictor of naturalistic human reading times. However, it has been speculated that this may be due to data leakage that caused language models to see the text stimuli during training. This paper presents two studies to address this concern at scale. The first study reveals relatively little leakage of five naturalistic reading time corpora in two pre-training datasets in terms of length and frequency of token n-gram overlap. The second study replicates the negative relationship between language model size and the fit of surprisal to reading times using models trained on 'leakage-free' data that overlaps only minimally with the reading time corpora. Taken together, this suggests that previous results using language models trained on these corpora are not driven by the effects of data leakage.
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Builds on6
- Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and ScalingStella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Quentin Gregory Anthony, Herbie Bradley et al.ICML 2023 · 1,822 citations
- ZeRO: memory optimizations toward training trillion parameter modelsSamyam Rajbhandari, Jeff Rasley, Olatunji Ruwase, Yuxiong HeSC 2020 · 852 citations
- Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language ModelsNicholas Carlini, Daphne Ippolito, Matthew Jagielski, Katherine Lee et al.ICLR 2023 · 158 citations
- The Linearity of the Effect of Surprisal on Reading Times across LanguagesWeijie Xu, Jason Chon, Tianran Liu, Richard FutrellEMNLP Findings 2023 · 11 citations
- How to Compute the Probability of a WordTiago Pimentel, Clara MeisterEMNLP 2024 · 2 citations
Related papers
- Transformer-Based Language Model Surprisal Predicts Human Reading Times Best with About Two Billion Training TokensByung-Doh Oh, William SchulerEMNLP Findings 2023 · 21 citations
- Temperature-scaling surprisal estimates improve fit to human reading times - but does it do so for the "right reasons"?Tong Liu, Iza Skrjanec, Vera DembergACL 2024 · 3 citations
- Language models emulate certain cognitive profiles: An investigation of how predictability measures interact with individual differencesPatrick Haller, Lena S. Bolliger, Lena Ann JägerACL Findings 2024 · 7 citations
- Measuring the Impact of (Psycho-)Linguistic and Readability Features and Their Spill Over Effects on the Prediction of Eye Movement PatternsDaniel Wiechmann, Elma KerzACL 2022 · 17 citations
- Probing for Reading TimesEleftheria Tsipidi, Samuel Kiegeland, Francesco Ignazio Re, Tianyang Xu et al.ACL 2026
