BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Yair Lakretz

Yair Lakretz contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computation and LanguageArtificial Intelligence

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Polar probe linearly decodes semantic structures from LLMs

How do artificial neural networks bind concepts to form complex semantic structures? Here, we propose a simple neural code, whereby the existence and the type of relations between entities are represented by the distance and the direction between their embeddings, respectively. We test this hypothesis in a variety of Large Language Models (LLMs), each input with natural-language descriptions of minimalist tasks from five different domains: arithmetic, visual scenes, family trees, metro maps and social interactions. Results show that the true semantic structures can be linearly recovered with a Polar Probe targeting a subspace of LLMs' layer activations. Second, this code emerges mostly in middle layers and improves with LLM performance. Third, these Polar Probes successfully generalize to new entities and relation types, but degrades with the size of the semantic structure. Finally, the quality of the polar representation correlates with the LLM's ability to answer questions about the semantic structure. Together, these findings suggest that LLMs learn to build complex semantic structures by binding representations with a simple geometrical principle.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Neural Language Models are not Born Equal to Fit Brain Data, but Training Helps

Neural Language Models (NLMs) have made tremendous advances during the last years, achieving impressive performance on various linguistic tasks. Capitalizing on this, studies in neuroscience have started to use NLMs to study neural activity in the human brain during language processing. However, many questions remain unanswered regarding which factors determine the ability of a neural language model to capture brain activity (aka its 'brain score'). Here, we make first steps in this direction and examine the impact of test loss, training corpus and model architecture (comparing GloVe, LSTM, GPT-2 and BERT), on the prediction of functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging timecourses of participants listening to an audiobook. We find that (1) untrained versions of each model already explain significant amount of signal in the brain by capturing similarity in brain responses across identical words, with the untrained LSTM outperforming the transformerbased models, being less impacted by the effect of context; (2) that training NLP models improves brain scores in the same brain regions irrespective of the model's architecture; (3) that Perplexity (test loss) is not a good predictor of brain score; (4) that training data have a strong influence on the outcome and, notably, that off-the-shelf models may lack statistical power to detect brain activations. Overall, we outline the impact of modeltraining choices, and suggest good practices for future studies aiming at explaining the human language system using neural language models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Can RNNs learn Recursive Nested Subject-Verb Agreements?

One of the fundamental principles of contemporary linguistics states that language processing requires the ability to extract recursively nested tree structures. However, it remains unclear whether and how this code could be implemented in neural circuits. Recent advances in Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), which achieve near-human performance in some language tasks, provide a compelling model to address such questions. Here, we present a new framework to study recursive processing in RNNs, using subject-verb agreement as a probe into the representations of the neural network. We trained six distinct types of RNNs on a simplified probabilistic context-free grammar designed to independently manipulate the length of a sentence and the depth of its syntactic tree. All RNNs generalized to subject-verb dependencies longer than those seen during training. However, none systematically generalized to deeper tree structures, even those with a structural bias towards learning nested tree (i.e., stack-RNNs). In addition, our analyses revealed primacy and recency effects in the generalization patterns of LSTM-based models, showing that these models tend to perform well on the outer- and innermost parts of a center-embedded tree structure, but poorly on its middle levels. Finally, probing the internal states of the model during the processing of sentences with nested tree structures, we found a complex encoding of grammatical agreement information (e.g. grammatical number), in which all the information for multiple words nouns was carried by a single unit. Taken together, these results indicate how neural networks may extract bounded nested tree structures, without learning a systematic recursive rule.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access