Syntactic Structure

Probability is fundamental to theories of language comprehension, production, acquisition, and evolution, as well as to large language models. Existing theories estimate the probability of syntactic structures from language-specific data. Whether part of this probability structure can arise independently of language-specific experience remains unknown. Here I show that a universal prior over syntactic structures emerges from a cognitively motivated model of incremental language production, in which words are progressively integrated into syntactic structure through network growth. The resulting prior assigns probabilities to syntactic structures --represented as dependency trees-- without fitting parameters to linguistic data, and assigns higher probabilities to attested than to random trees in all 138 typologically diverse languages examined. These prior probabilities correlate positively with probabilities estimated from corpora in 33 of 34 languages. The results indicate that part of the probability structure of syntax can arise independently of language-specific statistical learning. Linguistic experience may therefore refine probabilities that are already structured by the process of language production, rather than create them from an initially uniform space. This identifies a possible cognitive origin for part of the probability distribution over syntactic structures, linking language production and statistical learning while providing a data-independent structural bias for probabilistic models of language.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise for translating Natural Language (NL) planning descriptions into PDDL problem instances. However, standard evaluation criteria such as syntactic validity or planner success can substantially overestimate faithfulness to the described task: a generated problem may be parseable and solvable while misrepresenting the intended initial state, goal, object structure, or optimization target. This paper studies an end-to-end NL-to-PDDL pipeline that combines LLM generation, checks in terms of PDDL parsing, planning and validation, a domain-conformance checker, an LLM critic, and iterative repair. Fine-grained repair feedback is constructed from the domain description, the generated problem, the natural language problem description, and operational diagnostics. Reference-based comparisons against curated benchmark PDDL problem descriptions are used for post-hoc benchmark analysis, and these offline checks include renaming-invariant structural matching and semantic equivalence, where domain support is available. Across Planetarium, AutoPlanBench, and curated PDDL2.1 problems, results show that operational success and benchmark-reference reconstruction can diverge substantially. Results also show that structured repair can be useful, and that PDDL2.1 remains challenging for reference reconstruction, even when operational success improves.

Topic modeling is widely used in computational social sciences to identify latent themes in large text corpora. Traditional approaches rely on Bag-of-Words representations and generative models such as LDA, while recent methods like BERTopic operate on dense document embeddings. This paper introduces the Structural Contextual Probabilistic Topic Model (SCPTM), an architecture that incorporates syntactic dependency relations into topic inference. SCPTM represents a corpus as a heterogeneous graph of documents and words connected by lexical and syntactic edges, processed through a Graph Attention Network within a Variational Autoencoder to produce probabilistic, mixed-membership topic distributions. We evaluate seven topic modeling techniques (including four SCPTM ablations) across four corpora differing in register and discourse structure. Our framework combines coherence (C_V, C_NPMI), topic diversity, clustering-label alignment (NMI), and phrase-level diagnostics (complementarity and valence gap). Results show that SCPTM's neural architecture yields substantial gains in document-topic alignment over generative baselines, but these gains are attributable to the variational encoder rather than to syntax. Syntax contributes to topic diversity, where graph-augmented variants outperform the no-graph baseline across all corpora, and to descriptor quality: dependency paths capture predicate-argument structures and stance in deliberative registers, while proving redundant in technical and institutional corpora. The valence gap is positive across all variants, but driven primarily by phrase grouping rather than syntactic filtering. We conclude that syntactic encoding matters conditionally: it benefits action-oriented, argumentative texts, but introduces noise in informational or administrative registers.

This paper presents a small-scale quantitative experiment that links syntactic structure to stylistic functions in narrative prose. Starting from a dependency-parsed corpus of 3,300 sentences, we derive sentence-level stylistic labels across five categories --- descriptive, introspective, causal, ideological, and neutral --- using a transparent rule-based procedure that inspects lemmas, universal part-of-speech tags, and syntactic relations. For each sentence we construct a compact representation of its syntactic profile as a sequence of linearised triples combining lemma, POS tag, and dependency relation. These patterns serve as input to standard machine-learning classifiers trained to predict sentence-level style. The best-performing model achieves a macro-F1 of 0.948 under 10-fold cross-validation. The experiment is implemented entirely in Python using open-source tools. Our goal is not to propose a fully fledged stylistic theory, but to offer a reproducible and extensible workflow for exploring how grammatical structure contributes to narrative interpretation.

For every coherent and sufficiently expressive finite syntactic system S, we prove the existence of at least one theorem that S cannot produce autonomously. The result is a metatheorem: it proves the existence of a theorem, and applies to every finite syntactic system - security mechanisms, AI systems, formal verifiers, legal systems, economic models, and the formal system in which it is itself proved.

Let $L\subseteqΣ^*$ and fix a morphism $h:Σ^*\to M$ into a finite monoid. We study exact factorization and canonical presentation in the relative syntactic congruence $θ_{L,h}:=\equiv_L\cap\ker h$. We separate unique factorization from finite direct presentation. An exhaustively computer-checked $36$-element quotient has a unique exact prime factorization for every live non-unit class, yet its valid prime-return rules contain an infinite family, so unique factorization does not imply the finite relative presentation property (FRP), even for a finite quotient. We lift the same defect to a nonregular context-free language with an infinite relative quotient and finite prime spectrum. To isolate the obstruction, we introduce the finite-state relative presentation property (FSRP), in which canonical valid right-hand-side languages are represented by finite residual controllers, and prove $\mathrm{FRP}\subsetneq\mathrm{FSRP}$. We then introduce prime-target left-division determinism (PTLD), which implies unique exact factorization, tail exactness, tail determinism, and a quadratic bound on valid rules. A nonregular deterministic context-free example with a finite group observer satisfies PTLD while lying outside every fixed $(k,\ell)$-substitutable class. Finally, for fixed $h$ we give a strong positive-data learner for the canonical PTLD presentation with polynomial-time hypothesis updates and a finite characteristic sample, together with a limit reconstruction of the canonical FSRP controller from weakly behaviorally correct CFG-valued learners.

Multilingual large language models (mLLMs) achieve strong performance in machine translation, yet our understanding of the mechanisms by which they transform representations from one language to another remains incomplete. Prior work suggests that translation decomposes into separable processes within an mLLM, where conceptual content is first represented independently, followed by a production into language-specific form. In this work, we show that translation is even more modular than previously assumed and that the output language production in translation processes is actually further separable into a syntax and a surface language process. We construct controlled multilingual datasets that isolate cross-linguistic differences in word-order and use causal interventions and probing to track how representations are transformed during translation. We find that models first construct target-side word-order before realizing the target language surface form. We identify individual attention heads that are selectively sensitive to syntactic transformations while remaining largely invariant to language identity. These results establish the commitment to a syntactic structure as an independent stage in translation, extending prior decompositions and showing how translation is implemented by functionally different components within mLLMs.

Probing studies have established that syntactic information is decodable in early and middle transformer layers, but what happens to that information in later layers remains poorly understood. We apply a cross-layer generalisation analysis to three Greek-tuned large language models evaluated on tightly controlled minimal pairs: object-relative constructions in Modern Greek, where canonical (Subject-Verb-Object; SVO) and non-canonical (Verb-Subject-Object; VSO) orders differ only in within-clause word order, while preserving propositional meaning. When a probe trained on late layers (20-31) is tested on each early layer individually, it produces below-chance transfer (cluster-corrected, p<0.01), classifying 99.3% of non-canonical sentences as canonical. Probe coefficients reverse sign around layer 22, indicating a directional recoding toward the canonical form rather than simple information loss. These findings characterise a representational format change in late transformer layers that goes beyond the well-established decline in syntactic decodability, and they generate a directly testable prediction for human EEG and MEG decoding studies using the same stimuli. Code and stimuli are publicly available on OSF.

While it is well-established that prosody carries crucial cues for syntactic structure, the degree and nature of correspondence between these two domains remains contested. We investigate the syntax-prosody interface through an information-theoretic lens, quantifying the interaction between prosodic features and syntactic representations as their mutual information. We provide a general-purpose framework for estimating this quantity over large speech-text corpora using multimodal language models. Our framework is structure-agnostic and modular, insofar as it can be used to measure the contributions of individual prosodic features or components of structure. We evaluate the syntax-prosody relationship for two features (word duration and inter-word pauses) across two domains--read audiobooks and spontaneous conversations--both in English. Our results demonstrate that prosody contains measurable syntactic information, with prosodic features reducing syntactic uncertainty in spontaneous conversations by up to 10.2%. Our findings offer new empirical support for several theoretical accounts of the syntax-prosody interface.

Grammatical knowledge and how it is empirically tested are typically considered robust to the frequency of the lexical items in the expressions. However, neural network-based models of grammaticality exhibit high sensitivity to lexical frequency. We draw upon Complementary Learning Systems theory to test the hypothesis that robustness to lexical frequency can arise via a hippocampal episodic memory mechanism, which enables rapid encoding and retrieval of specific experiences and allows learners to leverage them when processing rare patterns. We use retrieval-augmented language models as an instantiation of such an episodic memory mechanism (specifically, $k$-nearest-neighbor language models that augment parametric models with explicit instance storage), and test whether this augmentation helps close the lexical frequency gap that vanilla language models exhibit in syntactic contrast tests. Using syntactic contrasts with frequency-stratified test items, we find that retrieval augmentation narrows the performance gap between high- and low-frequency items, consistent with episodic memory compensating for weak parametric representations. This benefit is consistent across different syntactic phenomena and across models pretrained on child-realistic and large-scale data. Additionally, we show that structural information is critical for effective retrieval, whereas semantic similarity alone provides little benefit. While these are promising proof-of-concept results supporting our hypothesis, the frequency gap is narrowed rather than fully closed. Based on our analyses, we propose preferential reweighting of retrieved instances, better representations and retrieval strategies for structural information, and flexible configurations of storage and retrieval as promising future directions for improving the implementation of episodic memory in language models.

We introduce Semantic Lenia, an artificial life framework that transforms Large Language Model (LLM) inference from a static optimization problem into a continuous dynamical system within the macroscopic logit space. By establishing a non-linear homeostatic feedback loop to dynamically balance semantic attraction and syntactic repulsion, we demonstrate the emergence of "Autonomous Semantic Solitons" -- macroscopic dissipative structures that avoid repetitive crystallization. Our exhaustive parameter sweeps map a critical "Habitable Ridge" where applied steering forces perfectly balance the model's intrinsic syntactic inertia. This approach successfully maintains generative trajectories at the edge of chaos, triggering profound abductive leaps without structural collapse and establishing a physical scaling law for machine cognition.

Quantitative language research often depends on long chains of computational steps, yet the logic connecting those steps usually remains buried in scripts. This makes analyses harder to inspect, share, and revise than they need to be. Focusing on quantitative syntax, we present QLWF, a visual workflow platform that turns natural-language research descriptions into executable workflows through an AI assisted five-stage pipeline. In this setting, reification makes the research logic visible as a workflow, while formalization gives that workflow deterministic execution semantics. The language model is used only during construction. Execution is handled by a fixed node library and engine, which keeps the resulting workflows reproducible. QLWF also supports incremental refinement, so saved workflows can be revised by changing only the parts that need to change rather than being rebuilt from scratch. To evaluate the approach, we build a 64-task benchmark called QL-Bench from the quantitative-syntax literature. Across three runs, QLWF produces structurally valid and executable workflows for every task and reaches a mean output-plausibility rate of 98.4%, well above the prompt-based baselines. On a separate 12-task lifecycle benchmark, this refinement process succeeds in every case and uses roughly one-third of the tokens required by full regeneration. The paper also releases the node library, benchmark, workflow templates, and platform as reusable resources for quantitative-syntax research.

Grammar Constrained Decoding (GCD) forces Language Models (LMs) to produce syntactically valid outputs by masking out non-conforming tokens at each step. However, rigid masking distorts the model's underlying probability distribution, often biasing generation toward valid but suboptimal outputs. While online sampling restores this distribution, it requires computationally expensive iterative resampling. As a result, existing methods force a compromise between output quality and inference latency. Our key insight is that the internal parser and lexer states inherently maintained during incremental parsing already encode future grammatical validity -- exactly the information required to restore the LM's true distribution. We propose a lightweight, offline-trained logit correction conditioned on this syntactic and lexical state together with candidate next tokens. Because these states are already computed as a necessary part of incremental parsing for masking, extracting them adds negligible overhead while leaving the base LM's weights completely untouched. Across several grammars, this correction substantially closes the gap between the masked distribution and the LM's true distribution, consistently outperforming both masking and online sampling. Even its lightest variant, which relies on the candidate next token alone, still matches or exceeds both baselines: the next token itself carries an implicit lookahead, much like how parsers commonly use a lookahead token to resolve ambiguous decisions. By restoring the probability mass that masking removes, it reconciles the LM's probabilistic integrity with grammar conformance.

Positional embeddings (PE) in Transformers encode token distance and order but are largely agnostic to \textit{syntactic structure}. We introduce \textbf{S}yntax-\textbf{i}nformed \textbf{P}ositional \textbf{E}mbeddings (\textbf{SiPE}), which learns a lightweight syntactic prior from dependency parses during pretraining and injects it across all three dominant PE families (absolute, relative, rotary), for both encoders and decoders, leaving self-attention and the rest of the architecture untouched. We isolate \emph{where} and \emph{how} the prior should enter the model, and find it depends on the architecture: for autoregressive decoders that use relative PE, the prior is strongest when coupled multiplicatively with the relative-position term of the attention score, outperforming injection into the input embeddings, into self-attention, or into the positional and attention terms jointly---while for encoders it is best added directly to the input embeddings, composing with each encoder's native positional mechanism. We find that models pre-trained with SiPE improve on the SyntaxGym benchmark by up to $10.3\%$ while simultaneously reducing perplexity by $9.0\%$ over a base model with no syntactic supervision---a metric nearly every existing syntax-injection method instead degrades. Crucially, these gains extend beyond syntactic generalization: SiPE also improves real-world language understanding, raising scores on the GLUE benchmark by up to $8.2\%$ over a model trained without it. Unlike existing syntactic language models that marginalize over many parses at inference or discard syntax at runtime, SiPE conditions on a single parse, establishing a new Pareto frontier between syntactic supervision and inference cost.

Large language models typically undergo post-training to align them with safety policies but there exist many sophisticated jailbreaks that sidestep established safeguards. For instance, prior work by Andriushchenko et al. (2025) has found that changing the grammatical tense from present to past can be enough to elicit harmful responses. In this work, we uncover a more general failure of non-imperative syntactic forms. We demonstrate that this syntactic vulnerability exists in 16 models up to 70B parameters, using behavioral evaluation. To investigate the root cause, we apply causal mediation analysis, finding that refusal is partially conditioned on upstream syntactic features. By steering these purely syntactic features we are able to trigger and suppress refusal. Finally, we trace this ill-conditioning to linguistically biased post-training data of open-source models and show that increasing syntactic diversity can mitigate the issue. Our findings suggest that current alignment approaches introduce confounders that prevent a pure semantic grounding of the refusal decision.

When a transformer learns an irregular morphological pattern, what has it learned? Our test case is the Spanish \emph{L-shaped morphome}, a complex irregular pattern in which the verb's stem alternates in exactly the first-person singular indicative and all subjunctive forms, and whose membership no phonological, semantic, or syntactic feature predicts. Prior studies have shown that character-level transformers can reproduce this pattern, but that evidence describes what models produce, not what they represent. Probing five architectures, twelve trained models each, under lemma-disjoint cross-validation with controls and surface baselines, we show that the models encode the L-shaped class itself, not just its visible alternations. It is decodable above every surface baseline, survives instances in which every form shows the same stem, and probes trained on alternating instances still classify non-alternating ones. The encoding is localized where the stem choice is made, at the stem-final consonant position of the middle decoder, before the alternant is read. And it is item-specific: which verbs a model learned matters far more than which architecture it is. The models store the morphome as an item-specific lexical abstraction, sufficient to reproduce the pattern but not to generalize it as humans do.

Ensuring behavioural correctness in communication protocols is a central challenge in distributed software systems, as subtle inconsistencies can lead to deadlocks. In such settings, protocol refinement - the safe substitution of a protocol that preserves correctness and compatibility with other components - is essential. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in code generation and program synthesis, yet lack mechanisms to reliably produce outputs with correct behaviour. Formal specification approaches, such as multiparty session types (MPST), offer rigorous guarantees, including deadlock freedom, but provide limited support for automatically constructing protocol refinements. In this paper, we present Syntropy, a framework for synthesising protocol refinements guided by MPST specifications and LLMs. It incorporates refinement constraints directly into the generation process, ensuring the generated variants satisfy these guarantees. Our comprehensive evaluation indicates that Syntropy achieves 95.6%-99.5% validity while maintaining high syntactic correctness, and produces diverse, non-trivial refinements across multiple LLMs.

Syntactic convergence (the tendency of speakers to adapt in language towards the grammatical profiles of their interlocutors) is a well-documented feature of human dialogue widely considered to operate below conscious awareness. Whether large language models exhibit analogous syntactic convergence toward human users relative to human baselines and across a broad range of syntactic constructions remains an open question. Using substitution-paradigm data in which model generations replace one speaker's turns in pre-existing human dialogues, this study measures turn-adjacent reuse of context-free grammar (CFG) rules across sixteen open-weight Llama and Gemma models (1B-70B, pretrained and instruction-tuned) at 1,901 matched positions per model. Every model showed greater CFG-rule overlap with the preceding human turn than with a sampled unrelated human prime, and in every model this actual-versus-random difference was larger for lower-frequency rules. Each instruction-tuned model also showed greater natural-output overlap with the actual prime than the human response it replaced, and all eight matched architecture pairs exhibited greater actual-prime overlap after instruction tuning. However, relative to pretrained variants, instruction-tuned outputs overlapped more with unrelated primes, showed a smaller actual-versus-random increment, and had lower conditional rule-reuse odds once target rule-set size was held constant. In exploratory analyses, each model exhibited greater mean lexical and semantic similarity to the preceding turn than the matched human responses did. Instruction-tuned models additionally produced responses with greater mean semantic similarity than their pretrained counterparts in all eight architecture pairs, whereas the lexical similarity results were more heterogeneous.

Large language models (LLMs) show promise in code generation, but their capabilities to produce correct, synthesizable hardware description language (HDL) code still remain to be properly benchmarked. Existing evaluations are primarily relying on pass@k metrics and lack proper end-to-end toolchain validation. This paper presents a reproducible benchmarking platform that evaluates open-source LLMs on Verilog RTL generation across 50 curated tasks consisting of combinational, sequential, finite state machine (FSM), and mixed designs. The pipeline consisting of constrained prompting, post-processing, and semantic-aware iterative refinement with waveform analysis, formal equivalence verification, and Abstract Syntax Tree (AST)-based repair validates the generated code via Verilator compilation and Icarus Verilog simulation. Across the 12 benchmarks and the 1,610 total runs evaluating three models of different sizes (Llama-3-8B, StarCoder2-7B, and TinyLlama-1.1B), the pipeline improved syntax validity from 0% to a 70.43% average and simulation pass rate to 51.8% across three open-source models. Most notably TinyLlama (1.1B parameters) achieved the highest individual syntax validity at 80.0%, with functional correctness comparable to the 8B model. The platform and dataset are open-source, enabling reproducible evaluation of generative AI for hardware design workflows.

Whether neural language models (NLMs) possess the ability to distinguish strings on the basis of their grammaticality remains a debated topic in the computational linguistics literature. Existing evidence has largely relied on probability-based measures, testing whether models assign higher probabilities to grammatical than ungrammatical strings. However, probability comparisons have been criticized as a measure for grammatical knowledge based on the assumption that grammaticality is inherently entangled with likelihood. Model-assigned probability is a function of many related sentence properties, such as lexical frequency, plausibility, and world knowledge. In this work, we move beyond probability-based evaluations and investigate whether grammaticality is encoded in the internal representations of NLMs. Using mass-mean probing, we test whether grammatical and ungrammatical sentences are systematically separated in representational space. We further examine the extent to which these representations are independent of sentence properties that are correlated with grammaticality, as well as their generalization across grammatical phenomena and languages. Our results provide evidence that grammaticality is robustly encoded in sentence representations of a wide range of pretrained NLMs, yielding clear representational separation on the dimension of grammaticality that cannot be fully explained by alternative sentence-level factors. Moreover, this encoding generalizes across a broad range of grammatical phenomena and to some degree, across languages, suggesting that grammaticality constitutes a coherent representational dimension in contemporary NLMs. These findings contribute new evidence to debates about the nature of syntactic knowledge in language models and offer a complementary framework for evaluating grammatical competence that is not dependent on string probabilities alone.

Large language models (LLMs) often produce homogeneous outputs, raising concerns that AI coding assistants may lead to convergence in the software artifacts that developers create. Whether this occurs in practice is unclear because developers interactively prompt, evaluate, modify, and reject model outputs, and because outputs vary with prompt and repository context. I examine code homogenization using Kaggle contest submissions from 2019 to mid-2026. I first document widespread convergence toward the random seed value 42, consistent with LLMs reinforcing a longstanding convention in programming culture. I then study homogenization more broadly, at two levels of aggregation and abstraction. At the submission level, I measure the average pairwise similarity of submissions within contests. At the contest level, I measure the conceptual span of submitted code, motivating distinct measures for each: TF-IDF representations, which capture surface syntax, and Voyage 3 code embeddings, which capture code intent and semantics. The results demonstrate substantial syntactic homogenization at both the individual and collective levels: individual submissions have become more alike in literal syntax and code structure, while the latent dimensionality of syntactic variation has narrowed. In contrast, I find little evidence of semantic homogenization, individually and collectively. Average semantic distance remains essentially flat, and the contest-level latent dimensional span of semantic approaches remains stable, with evidence suggesting it has even expanded modestly. These findings suggest that AI coding assistants are certainly standardizing implementation details, yet they have not yet produced evidence of homogenization in the approaches and problem-solving strategies coders employ.

AI coding agents are black boxes: we cannot inspect how they generate code, but we can inspect what they change. This distinction matters for search-based software engineering (SBSE), where techniques such as genetic improvement (in the performance-optimisation application we study) depend on mutation operators that reflect how code is actually transformed. Fewer than 1% of the 33,596 agent PRs in AIDev-pop target performance, making each case a rare window into otherwise opaque agent behaviour. We classify 1,254 performance-relevant diff hunks from 216 of these PRs, spanning five agent systems, against the 18-category syntactic mutation taxonomy of Even-Mendoza et al. (2025) using a dual-LLM intersection pipeline. Three categories dominate: name modification (37.0%), object creation (26.4%), and type change (22.7%), a profile markedly different from prior GI corpora where no change accounted for 84%. Each agent's deployed system commits to a distinctive mutation vocabulary, and each performance strategy activates a largely disjoint category subset. Agent identity and target strategy are therefore informative priors that narrow the effective SBSE operator space. Replication package: https://github.com/5uper6rain/ssbse-challenge-2026

When humans translate, not every word depends equally on the surrounding context. Some tokens, particularly function words like pronouns and auxiliaries, rely heavily on preceding or following sentences, while others, such as proper nouns, do not. Understanding this inherent context sensitivity is essential for evaluating whether machine translation systems use context in human-like ways. However, existing approaches to analysing context usage rely on discourse-specific test sets or model internals, making them narrow or model-dependent. We propose a post-hoc, model-agnostic framework to quantify context sensitivity at lexical and syntactic levels using two measures derived from word alignments: fertility (number of target tokens generated per source token) and entropy (stability of fertility patterns across contexts). Using reference translations for three language pairs (German $\leftrightarrow$ English, English $\rightarrow$ Hindi) under four context conditions, we show that context selectively redistributes generative responsibility from source to context tokens without altering overall fertility. Function words show the largest fertility reductions, while content words remain stable, suggesting that context resolves ambiguity rather than adding new information. Our framework provides a ground-truth characterisation of selective context usage in human translation, establishing a diagnostic baseline for evaluating machine translation models.

Can a vision model truly see an object, or does it only fit surface-level visual cues? Following Wittgenstein's view that the limits of language are the limits of the world, we view a model's recognition ability as bounded by the descriptive system it has learned. In current vision models, this system is often realized through learned feature representations that exploit local statistical cues. We therefore ask whether a model can still classify correctly when such local cues provide no stable basis for distinction. We formalize this question with syntactic distance, which measures class separability through the symmetry of the operations mapping one class to the other: positive distance exposes exploitable local features, whereas zero distance requires global semantics rather than local rules. We construct a visual self-referential task in maximum-variance binary noise: positive samples contain a closed square, while negative samples contain an otherwise identical square with one flipped boundary pixel. The two classes differ in global semantics but have zero syntactic distance, making local statistical shortcuts unreliable. Experiments on ResNets and Vision Transformers reveal a consistent phase-transition phenomenon, with accuracy collapsing to random guessing once the image scale crosses a critical point and does not recover within the tested range. Larger training sets and models only delay this collapse, while globally attentive ViTs reach it earlier. These results reveal a structural capability boundary of current architectures on global-concept tasks, suggesting that general intelligence may require creating new language, not reusing an existing one.

Formal semantics has shown that sentence meanings arise by recursively composing lexical meanings, yet much of the literature on semantic universals models either lexicons with fixed signal structures or holistic composition without interpretable lexical parts. We introduce a framework that integrates this fundamental insight of formal semantics in evolutionary modeling, by allowing lexical meanings and a composition function to co-evolve under pressures for conceptual simplicity and communicative accuracy. We apply this framework to the evolution of quantificational meaning. Analyzing the Pareto frontier, we find that the most well-known semantic universal, conservativity, emerges as an efficient system-wide abstraction. The account is sensitive to syntactic structure and helps reconcile tensions between empirical evidence on quantifier learnability and prior evolutionary models. More broadly, the results demonstrate that the picture of sentential meaning developed in formal semantics can be productively combined with evolutionary modeling. The framework offers a template for studying universals that involve global compression within a grammatical category, semantic specialization of syntactic arguments, and the co-evolution of lexical and compositional meaning.

Garden path sentences present a processing difficulty for humans -- the sentence prefix leads the listener towards one interpretation, until the listener hears a critical word that shows that the initial interpretation was wrong. Lexical surprisal, a measure that usually predicts sentence processing difficulty quite well, fails to provide good predictions for garden path sentences. We propose an alternative that actively predicts a probability distribution over syntactic trees (its syntactic belief) and updates that distribution after each new word. If a processor is led down a garden path, syntactic beliefs will be wrong and will require a large update at the critical word. The magnitude of the update is measured with a generalized Rényi divergence. Crucially, this metric is dependent on lexical items, but is fully independent of the probability of lexical items. This Syntactic Belief Update provides a better fit to the human reading time data on garden path sentences. This suggests a new research direction examining purely non-lexical alternatives to surprisal for psycholinguistics.

Large language models attain remarkable surface fluency on code, yet they do not formally guarantee the syntactic validity of their output, nor do they typically leverage the hierarchical structure that defines the target language. While existing constrained-decoding frameworks offer a solution to the former, they predominantly operate under rigid assumptions that preclude critical lexical mechanisms relied upon by modern parsers (e.g., Pythonic indentation). In this work, we present a formal engine and constrained decoder that is sound and complete with respect to the full Tree-sitter specification by augmenting generalized LR (GLR) parsing with a novel speculative-lexing construction that maintains concurrent lexer-state hypotheses synchronized with the GLR graph-structured stack. We also introduce Weave of Formal Thought (WoFT), a latent-variable fine-tuning method that trains the language model to interleave non-terminal grammar symbols directly into the generation process. Utilizing the reweighted wake-sleep (RWS) algorithm to optimize the importance-weighted evidence lower bound (IW-ELBO) of the surface text, the model learns to selectively retain formal derivations as an adaptive structural scratchpad. Across ten widely used programming languages spanning multiple paradigms, fine-tuning StarCoder2-3B with WoFT consistently outperforms text-only SFT baselines, achieving up to a 14.9% relative reduction in surface-token cross-entropy, and demonstrating that discretionary latent syntax recovers critical structural information that flat autoregressive training discards. Our code and implementation are publicly available at https://github.com/alexbouayad/formal.

Part-of-Speech (POS) tagging is a foundational NLP task underpinning machine translation, information extraction, and syntactic parsing. Despite Marathi being spoken by over 83 million people and ranking among the top twenty most spoken languages worldwide, it remains severely under-resourced in annotated corpora and standardised evaluation benchmarks. Marathi presents unique challenges for computational modelling owing to its rich morphology, relatively free word order, lack of capitalisation conventions, and pervasive code-mixing with Hindi and English. We introduce L3Cube-MahaPOS, a gold-standard POS tagging dataset for Marathi comprising 32,354 manually annotated sentences drawn from news text. Annotation was performed entirely manually by a team of Marathi-proficient annotators following a 16-tag Universal Dependencies-aligned scheme. A structured preprocessing pipeline covering Unicode normalisation, Devanagari-aware tokenisation, and noise filtering ensures label consistency across all splits. We benchmark the dataset across six model families spanning HMM, CRF, BiLSTM, BiLSTM+CharCNN, MuRIL, and the Marathi-specific transformer MahaBERT-v2. The best system achieves 88.67% token-level accuracy and a macro-F1 of 81.67% over 15 evaluated tag classes. We release the dataset, annotation guidelines, and trained model checkpoints to foster further research in Marathi NLP.

Despite their linguistic diversity and global significance, African languages remain underrepresented in research and resources to support NLP. We aim to bridge this gap by introducing AfriSUD, the first large-scale collection of syntactically annotated treebanks for nine diverse African languages spanning major language families and regions across Sub-Saharan Africa. Using the Surface-Syntactic Universal Dependencies (SUD) framework, our community-led effort provides high-quality, native-speaker verified data that capture typological key features such as agglutination and tone. We evaluate a range of models on AfriSUD for part-of-speech tagging and dependency parsing including non-transformer baselines, multilingual pretrained encoders, and LLMs. Our results reveal a significant syntax gap, where models still show clear limitations across the nine languages, suggesting that existing architectures may not fully capture the structural diversity of African-language syntax.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for code generation, raising concerns that they may be misused to produce malicious code. Meanwhile, Grammar-Constrained Decoding (GCD) has been widely adopted to improve the reliability of LLM-generated code by enforcing syntactic validity. In this paper, we reveal a counterintuitive risk: this reliability-oriented technique can itself become an attack surface. We uncover a new jailbreak attack, termed CodeSpear, that exploits GCD to induce LLMs into generating malicious code. Our experiments show that simply applying a benign code grammar constraint can effectively jailbreak LLMs. To address this vulnerability, we propose CodeShield, a safety alignment approach that robustly preserves safe behavior even under attacker-controlled grammar constraints. CodeShield aligns the model in the code modality by teaching it to generate honeypot code under GCD. Such code is semantically harmless, so it does not implement the malicious request, and structurally diverse, so it is difficult to suppress through grammar tightening. At the same time, CodeShield still preserves natural-language refusals when natural language is available. Experiments on 10 popular LLMs across 4 benchmarks show that CodeSpear outperforms representative jailbreak baselines and increases the attack success rate by more than 30 percentage points on average. CodeShield also restores safety under CodeSpear while preserving benign utility. Our findings reveal a fundamental risk of GCD and call for greater attention to its potential security implications.

Genetic programming (GP) is based on two important insights. First, that any learning task can fundamentally be posed as a program induction problem, where the goal is to construct a symbolic hierarchical model that is expressed as a syntax tree. Second, to pose this task as a search problem, and use evolution to locate the desired model. Since it was proposed, GP has produced notable results in a wide range of tasks and problem domains. This work presents an alternative view by modifying the second core insight of GP, posing the problem as a syntactic derivation task instead. In particular, this paper presents Minimalist Genetic Programming (MGP), an algorithm that like GP is biologically inspired, but instead of evolution it takes inspiration from the Minimalist Program to human language, in which syntax is understood as an optimal solution to the problem of linking two other mental systems. In minimalism, the core computational process is a binary set formation operator called $MERGE$, than can be used to incrementally construct complex syntactic structures using a simple Markovian process. MGP is able to discover the core building blocks of the symbolic expressions, and to incrementally combined them using $MERGE$. The proposed system is benchmarked on symbolic regression tasks that are known to be difficult to solve with standard GP systems because of the propensity for bloat. Results show that when a proper lexicon of atomic syntactic objects are chosen, MGP is able to consistently produce the exact ground truth model on a set of symbolic regression tasks where standard GP struggles to do the same. The insights provided by minimalism are shown to be relevant to the problem of program induction, and should be explored further based on the potential exhibited by MGP in this work.

Output space pattern sampling is a powerful alternative to exhaustive pattern mining for exploring large pattern spaces, as it enables users to focus on representative patterns drawn according to a chosen interestingness measure. In this paper, we address the problem of sampling interval patterns under user-defined syntactic constraints. We introduce CFips, a sampling approach that incorporates constraints directly into the sampling procedure. The approach relies on a multi-step sampling framework and supports several syntactic constraints by decomposing them into elementary predicates on interval bounds while preserving exact sampling guarantees. We formally prove that CFips samples interval patterns proportionally to their frequency within the constrained pattern space. The experimental results show that integrating constraints into the sampling procedure enables to complete mining tasks that would otherwise fail within a given time out.

Recursion enables the generation of hierarchical linguistic structures but imposes substantial processing demands during real-time comprehension. While difficulties with complex syntax have been reported in autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the temporal dynamics of recursive processing remain poorly understood. This study used event-related potentials (ERPs) to examine how Mandarin-speaking children with ASD process two-level recursive locative constructions. Twenty-four children (12 ASD, 12 typically developing, TD) participated in a cross-modal sentence-picture matching task. Neural responses were analyzed across three processing stages associated with structural prediction (P200), semantic integration (N400), and syntactic reanalysis (P600), with mental age controlled. Results revealed a systematic divergence between groups. TD children showed clear P200 and P600 modulation in response to structural mismatch, whereas ASD children exhibited attenuated early differentiation and reduced late reanalysis effects. In contrast, ASD children showed enhanced N400 responses under mismatch conditions, indicating increased semantic integration demands. In addition, the ASD group displayed significantly greater inter-individual variability in hemispheric lateralization, although lateralization strength was not associated with receptive vocabulary performance. These findings support a cascading account in which reduced early predictive engagement in ASD leads to increased integration costs and diminished reanalysis efficiency during recursive processing. More broadly, the results highlight the importance of both temporal processing dynamics and neural variability in understanding language differences in ASD.

This paper presents a French corpus annotated for multiword expressions (MWEs) with adverbial function. This corpus is designed for investigation on information retrieval and extraction, as well as on deep and shallow syntactic parsing. We delimit which kind of MWEs we annotated, we describe the resources and methods we used for the annotation, and we briefly comment the results. The annotated corpus is available at http://infolingu.univ-mlv.fr/ under the LGPLLR license.

Idioms can be analysed in terms of their decomposability, the extent to which constituent meanings contribute to the figurative whole. Decomposability is thought to predict syntactic flexibility. Usage-based accounts instead attribute idiom behaviour to distributional experience, such as speaker familiarity and predictability. We examine these views using contextualised language models as controlled distributional learners. We propose a model-internal measure of decomposability and relate it to human ratings, syntactic flexibility, and predictability while tracking idiom learning during pretraining. Model-derived decomposability correlates weakly with human judgments and shows a small but consistent negative relationship with syntactic flexibility. Pretraining analyses show that stabilisation of idiom representations in models is not explained by frequency alone. Instead, surprisal, decomposability, and frequency all contribute, with decomposability showing the strongest training-dependent effect.

What formal languages can a recurrent neural language model recognize? Formal results in the literature conflict: some authors report Turing-completeness, while others show equivalence to regular languages. The reason for this discrepancy is that the underlying arithmetic model differs. The paper develops a unified algebraic account of the expressivity of recurrent neural networks, starting with a formal account of various arithmetic models. This account reduces expressivity to an algebraic question, e.g., whether a network's syntactic monoid divides a certain wreath product. As a case study, the paper revisits diagonal state-space models: the same architecture cannot implement an even-modulus counter once floating-point recurrences are enforced, yet realizes every even-modulus counter under unsigned-integer quantization.

Grasping the semantics of rare constructions (form-meaning pairings) has been shown to be a challenging problem that has currently only been solved by the largest LLMs. It remains an open question if open-source models have robust constructional understanding, and if so, what learning dynamics underlie the acquisition of this knowledge. Focusing on a set of rare Paired-Focus constructions in English (e.g. "let alone", "much less"), we construct a novel dataset to test their meanings using both scalar adjectival semantics and general world knowledge. Testing a wide range of models differing in parameter count, architecture, and pretraining dataset size, we find that several modestly sized models are sensitive to both the forms and the meanings of Paired-Focus constructions, though models trained on human-scale data fail at all meaning evaluations. Turning to training dynamics for a set of open-checkpoint models, we find that Paired-Focus understanding emerges later in training than Paired-Focus syntactic knowledge, and that learning of Paired-Focus semantics is correlated with gains in some domains of world knowledge. Overall, our empirical results support the conclusion that modestly sized open-source models can grasp the rare Paired-Focus constructions, and demonstrate a connection between knowledge of Paired-Focus constructions and other meaning domains.

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly evaluated for whether they identify the right visual content, but little is known about whether they express such content in a discourse-appropriate form. We address this research gap using information structure (IS), testing whether VLMs distinguish discourse-old Topics from discourse-new Foci in visually grounded question answering. We exploit Hungarian, a language in which Topic and Focus map onto dedicated syntactic positions, making IS choices observable in text. Comparing six VLMs with human participants, we find that models produce IS-relevant constructions, but over-regularise this sensitivity. Under the interacting pressures of discourse status, grammatical role (preference for subject Topics) and definiteness (preference for indefinite Foci), humans choose variable strategies for IS realisation. VLMs, by contrast, collapse onto narrow response templates, resembling mode collapse (Kirk et al., 2024). Our findings suggest that VLM evaluation should look beyond content accuracy to how content is packaged for the discourse.

We revisit punctuation-aware tree binarization for constituency parsing and ask whether dependency-induced headedness improves binary parser supervision. Although learned heads substantially outperform rule-based heads in intrinsic head prediction, they do not yield consistent parsing gains after debinarization. In particular, punctuation-conditioned evaluation shows that learned headedness underperforms rule-based binarization in macro-average punctuation-sensitive $F_1$, despite a small overall gain on CTB. Similar instability appears under cross-treebank transfer. These results suggest that \ycc{linguistically grounded} headedness is not necessarily parser-optimal when used as a binarization control signal. The paper presents a negative result: better head prediction does not imply better punctuation-sensitive constituency parsing.

Generative translation systems are cultural technologies because they decide how socially meaningful cues are rendered within culturally specific grammatical systems. We study one concrete notion of successful cultural translation: when an English source explicitly encodes gender, an English-to-Hindi translation should preserve the recoverability of that cue unless the source itself is ambiguous. We evaluate this criterion on a 37,345-instance benchmark spanning twelve categories and show that five systems frequently erase gender through ergative and honorific constructions. We then introduce two mechanism-aware inference-time interventions. The first, the Source-Aware Reranker (SAR), prefers candidates that avoid gender-neutralizing syntax. The second, the Phenomenon-Aware Reranker (PAR), preserves gender through targeted lexical marking even when ergative syntax remains. Across GPT-4o-mini and Sarvam, PAR improves target-subset accuracy from 11.07% to 54.47% and from 15.99% to 49.66%, respectively. Human evaluation shows that PAR increases gender preservation from 10.3% to 81.3%, but reduces mean fluency from 4.36 to 3.37. These findings place the two interventions on a preservation and fluency frontier rather than supporting a single dominant solution, and show how culturally situated generation can require explicit tradeoffs among fidelity, fluency, and stylistic naturalness.

Structural probes train on Universal Dependencies (UD), which does not encode formal-syntactic abstractions such as phase boundaries or phase-internal cohesion. Whether large language models (LLMs) encode these remains an open question that UD-based probing cannot answer by construction. We evaluate structural probes on wh-movement stimuli where UD distances are invariant across conditions by design -- any non-zero effect therefore reflects structure beyond UD. The three conditions -- bare small clause, infinitival, and finite -- are ordered by the number of Minimalist Program (MP) phase boundaries the wh-element crosses. Across 13 LLMs from four families, we find a phase-count gradient on a cross-clause pair (12/13 models) and a 13/13 sign asymmetry on a within-clause pair whose UD distance is identical across conditions -- the latter specifically predicted by phase-internal cohesion, an MP abstraction invisible to UD by construction. Activation patching confirms the representations are causally active in 12/13 models. These findings suggest that distributional pretraining can induce representations aligned with formal-syntactic abstractions beyond the reach of annotation-based probing; UD-grounded probes provide a lower bound on syntactic encoding, not an upper bound.

Mathematical reasoning is a hallmark of human intelligence, requiring logical deduction, symbolic manipulation, and abstract thinking. Recent multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have demonstrated strong performance on geometry problems through multi-step reasoning. To better emulate human problem-solving, intermediate steps can incorporate auxiliary visual constructions, such as additional lines or points, which improve geometric interpretation and educational clarity. In this work, we introduce the GeoMathCode, where programmatic representations serve as intermediate visual outputs. We further conduct an in-depth analysis of the underlying reasoning geometry. Experimental results show that reasoning and code generation steps can be disentangled in the latent space, while supervised fine-tuning (SFT) makes the reasoning manifold more structured and informative. Moreover, hierarchical syntactic code structures emerge as disentangled latent subspaces, and contain more mathematical symbolic information than visual representations.

Language models are typically trained to predict the next token in a sequence. Here, we explore an alternative predictive principle from reinforcement learning: Successor Representations (SRs), which model the expected discounted distribution of future states rather than the immediate next state. We transfer this framework to natural language and train neural networks to predict future word distributions across multiple temporal horizons, thereby learning representations of long-range transition structure. We train a deep residual neural network on WikiText-103 (103 million tokens; 20,000-word vocabulary) and optimize successor representations as probability distributions using KL divergence. Without explicit linguistic supervision, structured language representations emerge spontaneously. After training, the learned space develops a clear geometric organization with respect to part-of-speech (POS) categories: nouns, verbs, and adjectives become separable and recoverable through unsupervised clustering. This organization depends systematically on predictive horizon, with short horizons producing the strongest syntactic structure and longer horizons increasingly integrating broader contextual and semantic information. At finer resolutions, additional interpretable lexical substructure emerges, revealing coherent subclasses within major word categories. These findings suggest that syntactic categories need not be explicitly encoded but may arise as a consequence of predictive sequence learning. To our knowledge, this work provides the first systematic application of successor representations to natural language and establishes a conceptual bridge between reinforcement learning, linguistics, and cognitive neuroscience.

Successive self-training on a language model's own outputs is widely characterized as a process of flattening: diversity drops, distributions narrow, and the text becomes "more like itself." We provide evidence that this characterization is incomplete. Across eleven generations of self-training on five models (GPT-2 124M, Pythia-410M, Pythia-1.4B, OPT-1.3B, Pythia-2.8B), language is not flattened uniformly -- it is restructured. Surface markers (discourse connectives, hedges, em-dashes) rise, while mid- and deep-syntactic structures (questions, parentheticals, passives, subjunctives) collapse. We formalize this asymmetric collapse as the Structural Depth Hypothesis (SDH): the per-generation decay rate of a linguistic feature is predicted primarily by its structural depth -- the number of nested syntactic dependencies it requires -- and only secondarily by its generation-zero output frequency. Pooling 17-feature panels from five models spanning three architecture families (N=85), the pooled Spearman correlation is rho=0.540 (p < 10^{-6}; cluster-bootstrap 95% CI [0.434, 0.634]), while frequency is a substantially weaker predictor (rho=0.225). A matched human-text fine-tuning control yields rho=0.039 (p=0.88), confirming the gradient is self-training-specific. We further document a Superficial Complexity Paradox: aggregate complexity proxies (dep-tree depth, TTR, word length) all rise as the underlying clause structure dies, with direct implications for training-data curation and LLM-text detection.

A key question in psycholinguistics is how inferences about the meaning of linguistic input unfold incrementally a comprehender's mind. In this work, we study reading dynamics for ``noisy-channel garden-path'' sentences, which temporarily appear well-formed but feature late-appearing violations of expectation that can be resolved not by inferring an alternative syntactic structure, but by inferring the presence of an error. We find evidence for targeted regressions -- eye movements towards regions that are promising loci of possible errors in light of later-arriving information, showing patterns consistent with the posterior inferences of a model of noisy-channel processing with reanalysis. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of noisy-channel language comprehension and information-theoretic explanations of reading dynamics.

Context. Metamorphic Testing addresses the test-oracle problem in scientific computing, but classical Mutation Score operates on syntactic AST mutations and misses domain semantics. Objective. We propose the Semantic Mutation Score (SMS), built on five domain-semantic operators (Conservation Erosion, Operator Substitution, Hyperparameter, Trajectory Flip, Structural Injection). SMS degenerates almost everywhere to MS in a characterised limit, so any SMS-based conclusion remains consistent with prior mutation-testing literature in the classical regime. Method. A 12-PUT x 5-MP design over four single-output float-to-float classes (numeric, probabilistic, surrogate, machine-learning) is paired with a three-layer attribution classifier separating true semantic faults from tolerance, OOD, statistical, and artefact categories. A same-source / cross-source ablation under an identical prompt isolates the LLM-source-diversity contribution. LLM-generated mutants are compared against a default-configuration cosmic-ray syntactic pool at the AST-normalised level. Results. The pre-registered large-effect threshold for Cliff's delta is not met under the point-estimate criterion; the observed effect lies in the medium-effect range. Cross-source pooling under an identical prompt does not appreciably shift delta, indicating that LLM identity is not the lever within this design. AST-level overlap between LLM-generated and default cosmic-ray syntactic mutants is small; the Hyperparameter, Structural Injection, and Trajectory Flip classes are unreachable under default first-order syntactic configurations. Conclusion. SMS is a backward-compatible adequacy metric for domain-semantic metamorphic-relation sets in scientific computing. The first-order unreachability evidence is independent of the effect-size question.

We describe the first experiment of conversion of Lexicon-Grammar tables for French verbs into the Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) format. The Lexicon-Grammar of the French language is currently one of the major sources of lexical and syntactic information for French. Its conversion into an interoperable representation format according to the LMF standard makes it usable in different contexts, thus contributing to the standardization and interoperability of natural language processing dictionaries. We briefly introduce the Lexicon-Grammar and the derived dictionaries; we analyse the main difficulties faced during the conversion; and we describe the resulting resource.

Large language models (LLMs) allow users to query databases using natural language by translating questions into executable queries. Despite strong progress on tasks such as Text2SQL, Text2SPARQL, and Text2Cypher, most existing methods focus on better prompting, fine-tuning, or iterative refinement. However, they often do not explicitly enforce structural constraints, such as syntactic validity and schema consistency. This can reduce reliability, since generated queries must satisfy both syntax rules and database schema constraints to be executable. In this work, we study how structured constraints can be used in test-time inference for Text2Cypher. We focus on post-generation validation to improve query correctness. We extend a confidence-based inference framework with a sequential filtering process that combines confidence scoring, grammar validation, and schema constraints before final aggregation. This lets us analyze how different constraint types affect generated queries. Our experiments with two instruction-tuned models show that grammar-based filtering improves syntactic validity. Schema-aware filtering further improves execution quality by enforcing consistency with the database structure. However, stronger filtering also increases the number of empty predictions and reduces execution coverage. Overall, we show that adding simple structural checks at test time improves the reliability of Text2Cypher generation, and we provide a clearer view of how syntax and schema constraints contribute differently.

This paper is concerned with what intermediate syntactic categories children acquire during first language development, and in what order. Maturational theories make different predictions. Bottom-up accounts (GROWING) propose that lexical and inflectional structure emerges first, while inward accounts (INWARD) predict early access to discourse-related categories. We computationally operationalise these hypotheses of staged syntactic emergence using statistical grammar induction, asking what each proposed ordering makes learnable when input and learning algorithm are held constant. Our framework makes category acquisition explicit and allows us to explore how different maturational orderings shape the structure that can be learned under identical conditions. Based on this operationalisation, the GROWING account significantly outperforms the INWARD account across three evaluation metrics.

Large language models are typically deployed as monolithic systems, requiring the full model even when applications need only a narrow subset of capabilities, e.g., code, math, or domain-specific knowledge. Mixture-of-Experts (MoEs) seemingly offer a potential alternative by activating only a subset of experts per input, but in practice, restricting inference to a subset of experts for a given domain leads to severe performance degradation. This limits their practicality in memory-constrained settings, especially as models grow larger and sparser. We introduce EMO, an MoE designed for modularity-the independent use and composition of expert subsets-without requiring human-defined priors. Our key idea is to encourage tokens from similar domains to rely on similar experts. Since tokens within a document often share a domain, EMO restricts them to select experts from a shared pool, while allowing different documents to use different pools. This simple constraint enables coherent expert groupings to emerge during pretraining using document boundaries alone. We pretrain a 1B-active, 14B-total EMO on 1T tokens. As a full model, it matches standard MoE performance. Crucially, it enables selective expert use: retaining only 25% (12.5%) of experts incurs just a 1% (3%) absolute drop, whereas standard MoEs break under the same setting. We further find that expert subsets in EMO specialize at semantic levels (e.g., domains such as math or code), in contrast to the low-level syntactic specialization observed in standard MoEs. Altogether, our results demonstrate a path toward modular, memory-efficient deployment of large, sparse models and open new opportunities for composable architectures.

This study contributes to a growing line of research in comparing LLM-generated texts with human-authored text, in this case, English news text. We focus in particular on the evaluation of syntactic properties through formal grammar frameworks. Our analysis compares two generations of LLMs in the context of two human-authored English news datasets from two different years. Employing the Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) formalism, we investigate the distributions of syntactic structures and lexical types of AI-generated texts and contrast them with the corresponding distributions in the human-authored New York Times (NYT) articles. We use diversity metrics from ecology and information theory to quantify variation in grammatical constructions and lexical types. We show that English news text has changed little in the given time frame, while newer LLMs display reduced syntactic and, especially, lexical diversity compared to older, non-instruction-tuned models. These findings point to future work in studying effects of instruction tuning, which, while enhancing coherence and adherence to prompts, may narrow the expressive range of model output.

Code translation is one of the core capabilities of LLMs. However, evaluating the correctness of translations remains difficult, as commonly used metrics such as BLEU measure only syntactic similarity, disregarding program semantics. We propose a novel evaluation methodology for code translation tasks, emphasizing semantic equivalence over surface-level string similarity. Our approach applies established compiler testing methodology to a new domain, allowing the assessment of an LLM fine-tuned for binary lifting tasks (i.e. decompiling binaries to higher-level representations). We introduce a semantic correctness score, defined as the proportion of translations that produce correct execution outcomes, and demonstrate its application by evaluating LLM-based and heuristic decompilers. Our findings show that LLM-based approaches significantly outperform heuristic ones, while BLEU scores show negligible correlation with semantic correctness (r = -0.127 to 0.354), demonstrating that syntactic metrics fail to predict functional accuracy.

The syntactic structure of a sentence can be represented as a tree where edges indicate syntactic dependencies between words. When that structure is a star, it has been demonstrated that the head should be placed in the middle of the linear arrangement according to the principle of syntactic dependency distance minimization. However, hubs of stars tend to be put at one of the ends, against that principle. Here we address two questions: (1) How difficult is it to minimize dependency distance? (2) Why anti dependency distance minimization effects have been found in star structures but not in path structures? The ease of optimization is determined by the shape of the optimization landscape. It was demonstrated that the landscape of star structures is quasiconvex (Ferrer-i-Cancho 2015, Language Dynamics and Change). As for (1), here we show that it is indeed convex (a particular case of quasiconvexity) both for star trees and quasistar trees and thus the distance-based optimization problem is simpler than previously believed. As for (2), we argue that (a) competing principles, rather than the difficulty of optimization, must be the actual reason for anti-dependency distance minimization effects and that (b) dependency distance minimization on star-like structures is less rewarding compared to other structures.

Maintaining information in context is essential in successful real-time language comprehension, but maintenance is cognitively costly and can slow processing. We hypothesize that rational language users selectively maintain information that is crucial for future prediction, guided by syntactic structure. Under this view, two factors affect maintenance cost: the number of predicted heads and the number of incomplete dependencies. Although these factors have been treated as competing hypotheses in the literature, our account predicts that they are not reducible to one another. We show this is the case in a naturalistic reading time dataset in Japanese, a language in which the two factors contrast particularly clearly. We further show that there is a tradeoff such that readers that slow down for maintenance tend to benefit more from predictability, providing additional support for the proposed account. These patterns are not evident in English, however, and we highlight some issues to be resolved to understand the contribution of syntax in memory-efficient processing of various languages.

Aspect Sentiment Quad Prediction (ASQP) has seen significant advancements, largely driven by the powerful semantic understanding and generative capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, while syntactic structure information has been proven effective in previous extractive paradigms, it remains underutilized in the generative paradigm of LLMs due to their limited reasoning capabilities. In this paper, we propose S^2IT, a novel Stepwise Syntax Integration Tuning framework that progressively integrates syntactic structure knowledge into LLMs through a multi-step tuning process. The training process is divided into three steps. S^2IT decomposes the quadruple generation task into two stages: 1) Global Syntax-guided Extraction and 2) Local Syntax-guided Classification, integrating both global and local syntactic structure information. Finally, Fine-grained Structural Tuning enhances the model's understanding of syntactic structures through the prediction of element links and node classification. Experiments demonstrate that S^2IT significantly improves state-of-the-art performance across multiple datasets. Our implementation will be open-sourced at https://github.com/DMIRLAB-Group/S2IT.

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit representational and syntactic biases that are difficult to evaluate due to the stochastic nature of text generation. Standard auditing methods rely on a single output inspection or static automated metrics. These approaches obscure the underlying probability distributions and fail to capture biases hidden in lower-probability generation branches. This paper introduces TreeTracer, a visual analytics tool designed to evaluate LLM bias through aggregated comparison. Using a systematic perturbation analysis pipeline, the tool replaces ontology-defined terms in each input prompt, aggregates hundreds of stochastic generations into a syntax-aligned hierarchical structure, and then performs classification-aware node merging with an auxiliary language model. The resulting structure is visualized through a custom Sankey diagram. By juxtaposing two ontology-driven trees, the workspace enables direct comparison between semantic contexts and supports systematic bias detection. Because any visualization reflects only a subset of the model's learned behavior, the system further applies contrastive inference to compute and directly display counterfactual token probabilities across contexts, reducing the risk of misinterpreting the presence of bias. We validate the workspace through case studies comparing an unaligned baseline model GPT-2 XL against the constitutionally aligned Apertus models. The visual aggregation successfully exposes hidden representational harms, such as counterfactual pronoun suppression and conversational marginalization of individuals. A preliminary user study confirms that the aggregated comparative interface reduces cognitive load and effectively supports analysts in detecting systemic biases.

While language models demonstrate sophisticated syntactic capabilities, the extent to which their internal mechanisms align with cross-constructional principles studied in linguistics remains poorly understood. This study investigates whether models employ shared neural mechanisms across different syntactic constructions by applying causal interpretability methods at a granular level. Focusing on filler-gap dependencies and negative polarity item (NPI) licensing, we utilize activation patching to identify the functional roles of specific attention heads and MLP blocks. Our results reveal a highly localized and shared mechanism for filler-gap dependencies located in the early to middle layers, whereas NPI processing exhibits no such unified mechanism. Furthermore, we find that these mechanisms identified by activation patching generalize to out-of-distribution, while distributed alignment search, a supervised interpretability method, is susceptible to overfitting on narrow linguistic distributions. Finally, we validate our findings by demonstrating that the manipulation of the identified components improves model performance on acceptability judgment benchmarks.

Sentence embedding techniques aim to encode key concepts of a sentence's meaning in a vector space. However, the majority of evaluation approaches for sentence embedding quality rely on the use of additional classifiers or downstream tasks. These additional components make it unclear whether good results stem from the embedding itself or from the classifier's behaviour. In this paper, we propose a novel method for evaluating the effectiveness of sentence embedding methods in capturing sentence-level concepts. Our approach is classifier-independent, allowing for an objective assessment of the model's performance. The approach adopted in this study involves the systematic introduction of syntactic noise and semantic negations into sentences, with the subsequent quantification of their relative effects on the resulting embeddings. The visualisation of these effects is facilitated by Concept Separation Curves, which show the model's capacity to differentiate between conceptual and surface-level variations. By leveraging data from multiple domains, employing both Dutch and English languages, and examining sentence lengths, this study offers a compelling demonstration that Concept Separation Curves provide an interpretable, reproducible, and cross-model approach for evaluating the conceptual stability of sentence embeddings.

Can syntactic processing emerge spontaneously from purely local interaction? We present a concrete instance on a minimal system: an 18,658-parameter two-dimensional neural cellular automaton (NCA), supervised by nothing more than a 1-bit boundary signal, is trained on the membership problem of an arithmetic-expression grammar. After training, its internal $L \times L$ grid spontaneously self-organizes into an ordered, spatially extended representation that we name Proto-CKY. This representation satisfies three operational criteria for syntactic processing: expressive power beyond the regular languages, structural generalization beyond the training distribution, and an internal organization quantitatively aligned with grammatical structure (Pearson $r \approx 0.71$). It emerges independently on four context-free grammars and regenerates spontaneously after perturbation. Proto-CKY is functionally aligned with the CKY algorithm but formally distinct from it: it is a physical prototype, a concrete instantiation of a mathematical ideal on a physical substrate, and the systematic distance between the two carries information about the substrate itself.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on natural language to SQL (NL2SQL) benchmarks, yet their reported accuracy may be inflated by contamination from benchmark queries or structurally similar patterns seen during training. We introduce SPENCE (Syntactic Probing and Evaluation of NL2SQL Contamination Effects), a controlled syntactic probing framework for detecting and quantifying such contamination. SPENCE systematically generates syntactic variants of test queries for four widely used NL2SQL datasets-Spider, SParC, CoSQL, and the newer BIRD benchmark. We use SPENCE to evaluate multiple high-capacity LLMs under execution-based scoring. For each model, we measure changes in execution accuracy across increasing levels of syntactic divergence and quantify rank sensitivity using Kendall's tau with bootstrap confidence intervals. By aligning these robustness trends with benchmark release dates, we observe a clear temporal gradient: older benchmarks such as Spider exhibit the strongest negative values and thus the highest likelihood of training leakage, whereas the more recent BIRD dataset shows minimal sensitivity and appears largely uncontaminated. Together, these findings highlight the importance of temporally contextualized, syntactic-probing evaluation for trustworthy NL2SQL benchmarking.