Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
102 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Attention-aware semantic relevance predicting Chinese sentence reading (2403.18542v1)

Published 27 Mar 2024 in cs.CL and cs.LG

Abstract: In recent years, several influential computational models and metrics have been proposed to predict how humans comprehend and process sentence. One particularly promising approach is contextual semantic similarity. Inspired by the attention algorithm in Transformer and human memory mechanisms, this study proposes an attention-aware'' approach for computing contextual semantic relevance. This new approach takes into account the different contributions of contextual parts and the expectation effect, allowing it to incorporate contextual information fully. The attention-aware approach also facilitates the simulation of existing reading models and evaluate them. The resultingattention-aware'' metrics of semantic relevance can more accurately predict fixation durations in Chinese reading tasks recorded in an eye-tracking corpus than those calculated by existing approaches. The study's findings further provide strong support for the presence of semantic preview benefits in Chinese naturalistic reading. Furthermore, the attention-aware metrics of semantic relevance, being memory-based, possess high interpretability from both linguistic and cognitive standpoints, making them a valuable computational tool for modeling eye-movements in reading and further gaining insight into the process of language comprehension. Our approach underscores the potential of these metrics to advance our comprehension of how humans understand and process language, ultimately leading to a better understanding of language comprehension and processing.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (108)
  1. Act-r: A theory of higher level cognition and its relation to visual attention. Human–Computer Interaction, 12(4):439–462.
  2. Semantic parafoveal processing in natural reading: Insight from fixation-related potentials & eye movements. Psychophysiology, 59(4):e13986.
  3. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4):390–412.
  4. Baddeley, A. (2010). Working memory. Current Biology, 20(4):136–140.
  5. Reading behavior predicts syntactic categories. In Proceedings of the 19th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, pages 345–349.
  6. Computational scientific discovery in psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(1):178–189.
  7. Explanatory model analysis: Explore, explain and examine predictive models. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
  8. Semantic facilitation and lexical access during sentence processing. Memory & Cognition, 6(6):644–652.
  9. Over-reliance on english hinders cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
  10. Enriching word vectors with subword information. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 5:135–146.
  11. Semantic context enhances the early auditory encoding of natural speech. Journal of Neuroscience, 39(38):7564–7575.
  12. Chen, Y.-P. (1996). What are the functional orthographic units in chinese word recognition: The stroke or the stroke pattern? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49(4):1024–1043.
  13. Pre-training with whole word masking for chinese bert. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 29:3504–3514.
  14. Predictability, plausibility, and two late erp positivities during written sentence comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 61:150–162.
  15. Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity. Cognition, 109(2):193–210.
  16. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805.
  17. Divjak, D. (2019). Frequency in language: Memory, attention and learning. Cambridge University Press.
  18. Swift: a dynamical model of saccade generation during reading. Psychological review, 112(4):777.
  19. Eye movement control in reading chinese: A matter of strength of character? Acta Psychologica, 230:103711.
  20. Semantic radicals contribute to the visual identification of chinese characters. Journal of Memory and Language, 40(4):559–576.
  21. Word predictability and semantic similarity show distinct patterns of brain activity during language comprehension. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 32(9):1192–1203.
  22. Predictive power of word surprisal for reading times is a linear function of language model quality. In Proceedings of the 8th workshop on cognitive modeling and computational linguistics (CMCL 2018), pages 10–18.
  23. How computational modeling can force theory building in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4):789–802.
  24. Hale, J. (2001). A probabilistic earley parser as a psycholinguistic model. In Second meeting of the north american chapter of the association for computational linguistics.
  25. Hale, J. (2016). Information-theoretical complexity metrics. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(9):397–412.
  26. Neurocomputational models of language processing. Annual Review of Linguistics, 8:427–446.
  27. Semantic similarity from natural language and ontology analysis. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies, 8(1):1–254.
  28. Semantic preview benefit in eye movements during reading: A parafoveal fast-priming study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36(5):1150.
  29. Cmcl 2021 shared task on eye-tracking prediction. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics, pages 72–78.
  30. Cognival: A framework for cognitive word embedding evaluation. In Proceedings of the 23rd Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL), pages 538–549.
  31. The principals of meaning: Extracting semantic dimensions from co-occurrence models of semantics. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(6):1744–1756.
  32. Huettig, F. (2015). Four central questions about prediction in language processing. Brain Research, 1626:118–135.
  33. Is prediction necessary to understand language? probably not. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(1):19–31.
  34. Semantic association computation: a comprehensive survey. Artificial Intelligence Review, 53(6):3849–3899.
  35. Parafoveal-on-foveal effects in normal reading. Vision research, 45(2):153–168.
  36. Reading metrics for estimating task efficiency with mt output. In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Cognitive Aspects of Computational Language Learning, pages 6–13.
  37. What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(1):32–59.
  38. Kurland, J. (2011). The role that attention plays in language processing. Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language Disorders, 21(2):47–54.
  39. Thirty years and counting: finding meaning in the n400 component of the event-related brain potential (erp). Annual Review of Psychology, 62:621–647.
  40. Levy, R. (2008). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106(3):1126–1177.
  41. An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29:375–419.
  42. Semantic preview effect of relatedness and plausibility in reading chinese: evidence from high constraint sentences. Reading and Writing, 36(5):1319–1338.
  43. Reading is fundamentally similar across disparate writing systems: a systematic characterization of how words and characters influence eye movements in chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2):895.
  44. Universal and specific reading mechanisms across different writing systems. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(3):133–144.
  45. An integrated model of word processing and eye-movement control during chinese reading. Psychological Review, 127(6):1139.
  46. Lindsay, G. W. (2020). Attention in psychology, neuroscience, and machine learning. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 14:29.
  47. Dependency distance: A new perspective on syntactic patterns in natural languages. Physics of Life Reviews, 21:171–193.
  48. Use of parafoveally visible characters during the reading of chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 28(5):1213.
  49. The effect of word frequency and parafoveal preview on saccade length during the reading of chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(7):1008.
  50. Eye movements and measures of reading time. In Eye guidance in reading and scene perception, pages 55–75. Elsevier.
  51. The effect of visual complexity and word frequency on eye movements during chinese reading. Visual Cognition, 22(3-4):441–457.
  52. How character complexity modulates eye movement control in chinese reading. Reading and Writing, 28:747–761.
  53. The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4):676–704.
  54. Explaining human performance in psycholinguistic tasks with models of semantic similarity based on prediction and counting: A review and empirical validation. Journal of Memory and Language, 92:57–78.
  55. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1301.3781.
  56. Mishra, R. K. (2009). Interaction of language and visual attention: evidence from production and comprehension. Progress in Brain Research, 176:277–292.
  57. Composition in distributional models of semantics. Cognitive Science, 34(8):1388–1429.
  58. Predicting human brain activity associated with the meanings of nouns. Science, 320(5880):1191–1195.
  59. Lexical surprisal as a general predictor of reading time. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 398–408.
  60. Replication and analysis of ebbinghaus’ forgetting curve. PloS one, 10(7):e0120644.
  61. Attention in language. In Neurobiology of attention, pages 324–329. Elsevier.
  62. Large-scale replication study reveals a limit on probabilistic prediction in language comprehension. ELife, 7:e33468.
  63. A review on the attention mechanism of deep learning. Neurocomputing, 452:48–62.
  64. Oberauer, K. (2019). Working memory and attention—a conceptual analysis and review. Journal of Cognition.
  65. Toward a universal decoder of linguistic meaning from brain activation. Nature Communications, 9(1):963.
  66. Tests of the ez reader model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eye-movement control. Cognitive psychology, 52(1):1–56.
  67. Can you hear what’s coming? failure to replicate erp evidence for phonological prediction. Neurobiology of Language, 3.
  68. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3):372.
  69. Eye movements as reflections of comprehension processes in reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(3):241–255.
  70. Semantic similarity, predictability, and models of sentence processing. Cognition, 122(3):267–279.
  71. Ensemble learning: A survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 8(4):e1249.
  72. Schotter, E. R. (2013). Synonyms provide semantic preview benefit in english. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4):619–633.
  73. Parafoveal processing in reading. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74:5–35.
  74. Task effects reveal cognitive flexibility responding to frequency and predictability: Evidence from eye movements in reading and proofreading. Cognition, 131(1):1–27.
  75. Semantic and plausibility preview benefit effects in english: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(12):1839.
  76. fmri reveals language-specific predictive coding during naturalistic sentence comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 138:107307.
  77. mgpt: Few-shot learners go multilingual. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.07580.
  78. The effect of word predictability on reading time is logarithmic. Cognition, 128(3):302–319.
  79. Readers are parallel processors. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(7):537–546.
  80. Ob1-reader: A model of word recognition and eye movements in text reading. Psychological review, 125(6):969.
  81. Directional skip-gram: Explicitly distinguishing left and right context for word embeddings. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 2 (Short Papers), pages 175–180.
  82. Sun, K. (2023). Optimizing predictive metrics for human reading behavior. bioRxiv, pages 2023–09.
  83. An interpretable measure of semantic similarity for predicting eye movements in reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, pages 1–16.
  84. Semantic similarity and mutual information predicting sentence comprehension: the case of dangling topic construction in chinese. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, pages 1–24.
  85. Attention-aware measures of semantic relevance for predicting human reading behavior. Linguistics.
  86. Positional specificity of radicals in chinese character recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 40(4):498–519.
  87. Talmy, L. (1996). The windowing of attention in language. Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, pages 235–287.
  88. Brain activation in the processing of chinese characters and words: a functional mri study. Human Brain Mapping, 10(1):16–27.
  89. Artificial cognition: How experimental psychology can help generate explainable artificial intelligence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(2):454–475.
  90. Thampi, A. (2022). Interpretable AI. Mannning.
  91. Tomlin, R. S. (1999). Mapping conceptual representations into linguistic representations: The role of attention. Language and Conceptualization, (1):162.
  92. Use of phonological codes for chinese characters: Evidence from processing of parafoveal preview when reading sentences. Brain and language, 91(2):235–244.
  93. Explaining forgetting at different timescales requires a time-variant forgetting function.
  94. Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30.
  95. Is semantic preview benefit due to relatedness or plausibility? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(7):939.
  96. Aligning context-based statistical models of language with brain activity during reading. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 233–243.
  97. Parallel, cascaded, interactive processing of words during sentence reading. Cognition, 189:221–226.
  98. Conceptualizing syntactic categories as semantic categories: Unifying part-of-speech identification and semantics using co-occurrence vector averaging. Behavior Research Methods, pages 1–28.
  99. Transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing. In Proceedings of the Conference on EMNLP: System Demonstrations, pages 38–45.
  100. Wood, S. N. (2017). Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
  101. Erps reveal sub-lexical processing in chinese character recognition. Neuroscience Letters, 514(2):164–168.
  102. A multitask comparison of word- and character-frequency effects in chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
  103. Preview fixation duration modulates identical and semantic preview benefit in chinese reading. Reading and Writing, 25:1093–1111.
  104. (early) context effects on event-related potentials over natural inputs. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 35(5):658–679.
  105. Semantic and plausibility effects on preview benefit during eye fixations in chinese reading. Reading and Writing, 25:1031–1052.
  106. Eye movements and parafoveal word processing in reading chinese. Memory & Cognition, 36(5):1033–1045.
  107. Investigating word length effects in chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(12):1831.
  108. The database of eye-movement measures on words in chinese reading. Scientific Data, 9(1):1–8.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (1)
  1. Kun Sun (51 papers)
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.