cs.CLSep 30, 2026

Compact Language, Complex Model Shifts: How and Where Ambiguity and Underspecification Affect LLMs

Authors: Michaela Regneri, Nina Scheller, Sören Laue

Organizations: HAW Hamburg · Universität Hamburg

Abstract

We analyze how lexical ambiguity and underspecification affect language model training. We create artificial homonyms and artificial hypernyms as pseudowords and analyze the generative performance of language models as they are trained with increasing amounts of these ambiguous or underspecified pseudoword types. We further analyze whether the models disambiguate ambiguous or underspecified statements and provide a first mechanistic account of how ambiguity and disambiguation are represented internally. Our main results show that both ambiguity and underspecification increase model performance in ways that scale with their influence on the language's type-token ratio. However, the accuracy of generating sequences containing ambiguous words or their synonyms decreases compared to other texts. We also show that internal representations of pseudowords reflect disambiguation of pseudo-homonyms, but underspecification of pseudo-hypernyms is maintained during the generative process.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables9 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Oct 6, 2026

Pseudowords as probes: Large Language Models show little of the sublexical sensitivity that governs human pseudoword processing

Systematicity, the probabilistic mapping of form to meaning, permeates language at all levels, and sublexical cues have been shown to govern human pseudoword processing. Yet whether LLMs exhibit comparable sensitivity to these cues remains unclear. We tested five LLMs on two Italian two-alternative forced-choice pseudoword experiments and compared their responses with a human behavioural baseline. LLMs aligned more reliably with humans when real-word options provided a lexical familiarity cue than in the pseudoword-only condition, where they fell substantially below fastText, a character-n-gram model. In addition, the sublexical cosine-similarity cue that reliably drove human--fastText agreement did not consistently transfer to human--LLM alignment, and reasoning-token expenditure bore no consistent relation to human processing difficulty. These findings suggest that LLMs do not necessarily share the sublexical cues that govern human pseudoword processing; we discuss tokenization and training-data coverage as candidate explanations.
May 15, 2026

Evaluating Chinese Ambiguity Understanding in Large Language Models

Linguistic ambiguity is critical to the robustness of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet existing research focuses mostly on English, with limited attention devoted to Chinese. Existing Chinese ambiguity datasets (e.g., CHAmbi) suffer from poor scalability. Guided by Potential Ambiguity (PA) Theory, we design a semi-automatic pipeline to construct CHA-Gen. It is the first PA Theory-grounded Chinese ambiguity dataset, which comprises 5,712 sentences (2,414 ambiguous, 3,298 unambiguous) across 18 potential ambiguous structures. Evaluating LLMs (e.g. Gemma 3, Qwen 2.5/3 series) via direct querying and machine translation, we find that LLMs struggle with ambiguity detection (improved by CoT prompting). Analysis of Qwen3-32B's CoT rationales reveals three common failure modes: ambiguity blindness, misattribution, and premature resolution. Uncertainty quantification with semantic entropy metric shows higher uncertainty for ambiguous sentences. Moreover, instruction tuning induces overconfidence, whereas Base models better capture semantic diversity. We further observe that models exhibit a bias toward dominant interpretations. Our work provides a scalable approach for Chinese ambiguity corpus and insights into LLMs' ambiguity handling, laying a foundation for enhancing Chinese ambiguity research in LLMs.
Aug 15, 2026

Language models suffer from a curse of ambiguity

Large language models increasingly rely on sampling as a driver of their own improvement, making the fidelity of their learned distributions more critical than ever. Yet, not all distributions are equally easy to learn. In this work, we identify a curse of ambiguity: in large language models, and more broadly in all neural networks that produce discrete probability distributions, the more ambiguous a next-token distribution is, the harder it is to learn accurately. Through an extensive theoretical analysis, we trace this curse to architectural and learning roots. More ambiguous distributions require more capacity to be stored, larger embeddings to be represented, more steps to be fitted, and amplify token-sampling noise. We validate these findings on synthetic tasks with controlled ground truth and observe the same signatures in language models trained on real data. Our results provide a new perspective on the statistical capabilities of large language models and a practical framework for when to trust their output distribution.