Datasets for Verb Alternations across Languages: BLM Templates and Data Augmentation Strategies

This article describes a novel language task, the Blackbird Language Matrices (BLM) task, inspired by intelligence tests, and illustrates the BLM datasets, their construction and benchmarking, and targeted experiments on chunking and systematicity. BLMs are multiple-choice problems, structured at multiple levels: within each sentence, across the input sequence, within each candidate answer. Because of their rich structure, these curated, but naturalistic datasets are key to answer some core questions about current large language models abilities: do LLMs detect linguistic objects and their properties? Do they detect and use systematic patterns across sentences? Are they more prone to linguistic or reasoning errors, and how do these interact? We show that BLMs, while challenging, can be solved at good levels of performance, in more than one language, with simple baseline models or, at better performance levels, with more tailored models. We show that their representations contain the grammatical objects and attributes relevant to solve a linguistic task. We also show that these solutions are reached by detecting systematic patterns across sentences. The paper supports the point of view that curated, structured datasets support multi-faceted investigations of properties of language and large language models. Because they present a curated, articulated structure, because they comprise both learning contexts and expected answers, and because they are partly built by hand, BLMs fall in the category of datasets that can support explainability investigations, and be useful to ask why large language models behave the way they do.

This study compares the impact of natural and synthetic data on training and evaluating large language models (LLMs), using the case of passive verb alternation in French and Italian. We use Blackbird Language Matrices (BLMs), structured datasets designed to probe linguistic knowledge of underlying patterns across sentence sets. We compare structured templates instantiated with natural sentences extracted from Universal Dependencies to structured templates of synthetic sentences. Experiments show that while models achieve ceiling performance when trained and tested on synthetic datasets, they do not reliably generalize to natural sentences. In contrast, models trained on natural data exhibit robust performance across both natural and synthetic test suites, demonstrating their superior ability to capture abstract linguistic patterns. These results corroborate the value of natural data and of structured set ups in linguistic evaluation for probing LLMs' syntactic and semantic knowledge.

Frequent verbs such as 'have' and 'make' can function either as collocates in light-verb constructions or as full lexical predicates, as in 'make a decision' vs. 'make a cake'. Whether language models represent this distinction, and whether such representations vary across languages, remains unclear. We introduce a large-scale controlled dataset in English, Spanish, and French, comprising minimally varying sentence series in which the same context contains the same verb in light-verb and full-verb uses. Two probing experiments show that language models differentiate between these uses even in minimal contexts and exhibit separable patterns across object types. We release the dataset, generation code, and materials as a reusable resource. The framework supports extensions to broader contexts, additional verbs, and other languages.