Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
133 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Towards a Fully Interpretable and More Scalable RSA Model for Metaphor Understanding (2404.02983v1)

Published 3 Apr 2024 in cs.CL

Abstract: The Rational Speech Act (RSA) model provides a flexible framework to model pragmatic reasoning in computational terms. However, state-of-the-art RSA models are still fairly distant from modern machine learning techniques and present a number of limitations related to their interpretability and scalability. Here, we introduce a new RSA framework for metaphor understanding that addresses these limitations by providing an explicit formula - based on the mutually shared information between the speaker and the listener - for the estimation of the communicative goal and by learning the rationality parameter using gradient-based methods. The model was tested against 24 metaphors, not limited to the conventional $\textit{John-is-a-shark}$ type. Results suggest an overall strong positive correlation between the distributions generated by the model and the interpretations obtained from the human behavioral data, which increased when the intended meaning capitalized on properties that were inherent to the vehicle concept. Overall, findings suggest that metaphor processing is well captured by a typicality-based Bayesian model, even when more scalable and interpretable, opening up possible applications to other pragmatic phenomena and novel uses for increasing LLMs interpretability. Yet, results highlight that the more creative nuances of metaphorical meaning, not strictly encoded in the lexical concepts, are a challenging aspect for machines.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (47)
  1. “Lexical Pragmatic Adjustment and the Nature of ad-hoc Concepts” In International Review of Pragmatics 4.2, 2012, pp. 185–208 DOI: 10.1163/18773109-00040204
  2. “Metaphor and Experimental Pragmatics: When Theory Meets Empirical investigation” In HUMANA.MENTE Journal of Philosophical Studies 5.23, 2012, pp. 37–60
  3. “The Pragmatic Profile of ChatGPT: Assessing the Communicative Skills of a Conversational Agent” In Sistemi Intelligenti 35.2 Società Editrice il Mulino, 2023, pp. 379–400 DOI: 10.1422/108136
  4. Leon Bergen, Roger Levy and Noah Goodman “Pragmatic Reasoning Through Semantic Inference” In Semantics and Pragmatics 9, 2016, pp. 20 DOI: 10.3765/sp.9.20
  5. “Exploring the Prospects and Challenges of Large Language Models for Language Learning and Production” In Sistemi Intelligenti 35.2 Società Editrice il Mulino, 2023, pp. 361–378 DOI: 10.1422/108135
  6. Harry Bunt “Computational Pragmatics” In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics Oxford University Press, 2017, pp. 326–345 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697960.013.18
  7. “N400 Differences Between Physical and Mental Metaphors: The Role of Theories of Mind” In Brain and Cognition 161, 2022, pp. 105879 DOI: 10.1016/j.bandc.2022.105879
  8. “Large Language Models Behave (Almost) As Rational Speech Actors: Insights From Metaphor Understanding” In Proceedings of NeurIPS 2023 Workshop Information-Theoretic Principles in Cognitive Systems, 2023
  9. Robyn Carston “Metaphor: Ad hoc Concepts, Literal Meaning and Mental Images” In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 3__\__pt__\__3\bibrangessep295–321 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9264.2010.00288.x
  10. “FLUTE: Figurative Language Understanding through Textual Explanations” In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing Association for Computational Linguistics, 2022, pp. 7139–7159 DOI: 10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.481
  11. Judith Degen “The Rational Speech Act Framework” In Annual Review of Linguistics 9.1 Annual Reviews, 2023, pp. 519–540 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-010811
  12. “When Redundancy is Useful: A Bayesian Approach to “Overinformative” Referring Expressions.” In Psychological Review 127.4 American Psychological Association, 2020, pp. 591–621 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000186
  13. Vittoria Dentella, Fritz Günther and Evelina Leivada “Systematic Testing of Three Language Models Reveals Low Language Accuracy, Absence of Response Stability, and a Yes-Response Bias” In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120.51, 2023, pp. e2309583120 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2309583120
  14. “On the Creativity of Large Language Models” In arXiv preprint, 2023 DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2304.00008
  15. Michael C. Frank and Noah D. Goodman “Predicting Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Games” In Science 336.6084, 2012, pp. 998–998 DOI: 10.1126/science.1218633
  16. Raymond W Gibbs “The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought” Cambridge University Press, 2008
  17. Raymond W. Gibbs “Pragmatic complexity in metaphor interpretation” In Cognition 237, 2023, pp. 105455 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105455
  18. Sam Glucksberg “The Psycholinguistics of Metaphor” In Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7.2 Elsevier, 2003, pp. 92–96 DOI: 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00040-2
  19. Noah D. Goodman and Michael C. Frank “Pragmatic Language Interpretation as Probabilistic Inference” In Trends in Cognitive Sciences 20.11, 2016, pp. 818–829 DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.08.005
  20. Noah D Goodman and Andreas Stuhlmüller “Knowledge and Implicature: Modeling Language Understanding as Social Cognition” In Topics in Cognitive Science 5.1 Wiley Online Library, 2013, pp. 173–184 DOI: 10.1111/tops.12007
  21. Paul Grice “Studies in the Way of Words” Harvard University Press, 1991
  22. Robert D Hawkins, Hyowon Gweon and Noah D Goodman “The Division of Labor in Communication: Speakers Help Listeners Account for Asymmetries in Visual Perspective” In Cognitive Science 45.3 Wiley Online Library, 2021, pp. e12926 DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12926
  23. Daphna Heller, Christopher Parisien and Suzanne Stevenson “Perspective-taking Behavior as the Probabilistic Weighing of Multiple Domains” In Cognition 149, 2016, pp. 104–120 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.12.008
  24. Keith J. Holyoak and Dusan Stamenkovic “Metaphor Comprehension: A Critical Review of Theories and Evidence” In Psychological Bulletin 144(6), 2018, pp. 641–671 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000145
  25. “A Fine-Grained Comparison of Pragmatic Language Understanding in Humans and Language Models” In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) Toronto, Canada: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023, pp. 4194–4213 DOI: 10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.230
  26. Justine T. Kao and Noah D. Goodman “Let’s Talk (Ironically) About the Weather: Modeling Verbal Irony.” In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2015, 2015, pp. 1051–1056
  27. Justine T. Kao, Leon Bergen and Noah D. Goodman “Formalizing the Pragmatics of Metaphor Understanding” In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2014, 2014, pp. 719–724
  28. Walter Kintsch “Metaphor Comprehension: A Computational Theory” In Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 7.2 Springer, 2000, pp. 257–266 DOI: 10.3758/BF03212981
  29. “Production Expectations Modulate Contrastive Inference” In Proceedings of the 42th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society - Developing a Mind: Learning in Humans, Animals, and Machines, CogSci 2020, Virtual, July 29 - August 1, 2020, 2020
  30. Alessandro Lenci “Understanding Natural Language Understanding Systems” In Sistemi Intelligenti 35.2 Società Editrice il Mulino, 2023, pp. 277–302 DOI: 10.1422/107438
  31. David Kellogg Lewis “Convention: A Philosophical Study” Wiley-Blackwell, 1969
  32. “Pragmatics of Metaphor Revisited: Formalizing the Role of Typicality and Alternative Utterances in Metaphor Understanding.” In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society: Cognitive Diversity, CogSci 2021, 2021, pp. 3154–3160
  33. “Semantic Feature Production Norms for a Large Set of Living and Nonliving Things” In Behavior Research Methods 37.4, 2005, pp. 547–559 DOI: 10.3758/BF03192726
  34. Andrea Moro “Embodied Syntax: Impossible Languages and the Irreducible Difference between Humans and Machines” In Sistemi Intelligenti 35.2 Società Editrice il Mulino, 2023, pp. 321–328 DOI: 10.1422/108132
  35. “The Language of Creativity: Evidence from Humans and Large Language Models” In The Journal of Creative Behavior Wiley Online Library, 2024 DOI: 10.1002/jocb.636
  36. “A Howling Success or a Working Sea? Testing What BERT Knows About Metaphors” In Proceedings of the Fourth BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP Punta Cana, Dominican Republic: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2021, pp. 192–204 DOI: 10.18653/v1/2021.blackboxnlp-1.13
  37. “Variations on a Bayesian Theme: Comparing Bayesian Models of Referential Reasoning” In Bayesian Natural Language Semantics and Pragmatics Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 201–220 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-17064-0_9
  38. “Communicating with Cost-based Implicature: a Game-theoretic Approach to Ambiguity” In Proceedings of SemDial 2012 (SeineDial): The 16th Workshop on Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue, 2012, pp. 107–116
  39. Gregory Scontras and Noah D Goodman “Resolving uncertainty in plural predication” In Cognition 168 Elsevier, 2017, pp. 294–311 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.07.002
  40. Ekaterina Shutova “Automatic metaphor interpretation as a paraphrasing task” In Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010, pp. 1029–1037
  41. “Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd edition)”, 1995
  42. “A Deflationary Account of Metaphors” In The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought Cambridge University Press, 2008, pp. 84–105 DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.007
  43. Chang Su, Shuman Huang and Yijiang Chen “Automatic Detection and Interpretation of Nominal Metaphor Based on the Theory of Meaning” In Neurocomputing 219, 2017, pp. 300–311 DOI: 10.1016/j.neucom.2016.09.030
  44. Robert Twomey “Communing with Creative AI” In Proceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques 6.2 ACM New York, NY, USA, 2023, pp. 28 DOI: 10.1145/3597633
  45. Akira Utsumi “Computational Exploration of Metaphor Comprehension Processes Using a Semantic Space Model” In Cognitive Science 35.2 Wiley Online Library, 2011, pp. 251–296 DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01144.x
  46. Tony Veale, Ekaterina Shutova and Beata Beigman Klebanov “Metaphor: A Computational Perspective” Springer Cham, 2016
  47. “Metaphor and the ’Emergent Property’ Problem: A Relevance-Theoretic Approach” In Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 3, 2007, pp. 1–40 DOI: 10.4148/biyclc.v3i0.23
Citations (1)

Summary

  • The paper introduces a novel RSA model that integrates gradient-based optimization to estimate communicative goals in metaphor comprehension.
  • It employs an explicit probability formula and behavioral experiments to assess scalability and interpretability across varied metaphorical expressions.
  • Results show strong alignment with human interpretation while underscoring challenges in capturing the creative nuances of metaphors.

Enhancing Metaphor Understanding through an Interpretable RSA Model

Introduction to the RSA Framework and Metaphor Understanding

The Rational Speech Act (RSA) model operates on the interface between game-theoretic and decision-theoretic principles to explicate verbal communication. It frames language use as a probabilistic signaling game, significantly informing the comprehension of a myriad of pragmatic phenomena, ranging from reference determination to the understanding of non-literal language, such as metaphors. Despite its computational and mathematical foundation, the RSA framework's integration with cutting-edge machine learning techniques remains superficial. RSA models grapple with high computational demands, scalability issues, and a notable dearth in interpretability particularly when out-of-domain generalization is attempted.

Objective and Novelty of the Proposed RSA Model

In this paper, we aim to bridge the gap between the RSA framework and contemporary AI methodologies through a novel RSA model specifically tailored for metaphor comprehension. This model introduces significant advancements by incorporating an explicit formula to estimate communicative goals, utilizing gradient-based methods to learn rationality parameters, and testing against a diversified set of metaphors beyond the traditional "John-is-a-shark" type.

Key Features of the Computational Model

Our model maintains the core structure of its predecessors but innovates in several critical aspects:

  • Explicit Estimation of Communicative Goal Probability: The model incorporates a formula to explicitly estimate the probability distribution of communicative goals based on the minimal conversational context and mutual information shared between the speaker and listener.
  • Gradient-Based Learning of Rationality Parameter: Unlike prior models that relied on interpolation for parameter estimation, our approach leverages gradient-based optimization techniques to efficiently learn the rationality parameter (λ\lambda), enhancing the model's scalability and interpretability.
  • Comprehensive Testing on Diverse Metaphors: Our analysis extends to metaphors involving a variety of topics and vehicles, examining the model's generalizability and effectiveness across a broader spectrum of metaphorical expressions.

Evaluation and Findings

The novel RSA model was evaluated through behavioral experiments targeting metaphor understanding. The results showcased a strong positive correlation between the model-generated distributions and human interpretations, particularly when the metaphors employed vehicle-inherent properties. However, the model exhibited limitations in grasping the nuanced, creative aspects of metaphor not directly encoded in lexical concepts. This discrepancy underscores the challenges machines face in apprehending the most inventive facets of human language.

Implications and Future Directions

The proposed RSA model demonstrates considerable promise in enhancing the interpretability and scalability of computational models for metaphor understanding. By effectively integrating gradient-based learning techniques, the model not only aligns more closely with state-of-the-art AI but also suggests a pathway for improving LLMs' (LLMs) interpretability. Our findings also pave the way for applying this refined RSA framework to a broader array of pragmatic phenomena beyond metaphor, potentially offering a deeper understanding of complex linguistic and cognitive processes.

It is essential to acknowledge, however, that the journey to fully comprehend the intricacies of metaphorical language through computational models is ongoing. The evident gap in capturing creative and context-dependent metaphorical nuances invites further research, perhaps focusing on integrating sensory experience, emotive resonance, and the context's dynamic aspects into the RSA framework.

Future endeavors could also explore the model's applicability in deciphering the operational principles of the latest generation of LLMs or developing novel algorithms to tackle the creative and less predictable segments of metaphor interpretation. As we continue to refine and expand upon RSA-based models, the convergence of classic pragmatic theory and modern machine learning techniques holds untold potential for advancing our understanding of human language and cognition.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com