Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2305.11169v1

In their paper titled "Evidence of Meaning in Language Models Trained on Programs," Charles Jin and Martin Rinard present evidence that language models can learn meaning despite being trained only to perform next token prediction on text. Specifically, they train a Transformer model on a corpus of programs, each preceded by a specification in the form of input-output examples. This approach enables them to precisely define concepts relevant to meaning in language, such as correctness and semantics, making program synthesis well-suited as an intermediate testbed for characterizing the presence or absence of meaning in language models. The authors probe the trained model's hidden states as it completes a program given a specification and find that a linear probe is able to extract abstractions of both current and future program states from the model states. They also observe a strong correlation between the accuracy of the probe and the model's ability to generate a program that implements the specification. To evaluate whether the semantics are represented in the model states rather than learned by the probe, they design an experimental procedure which intervenes on the semantics of language while preserving syntax and lexicon. The authors demonstrate that their model learns to generate correct programs which are shorter than those in training set; this suggests that language model outputs may differ from training distribution in semantically meaningful ways. Overall, this paper does not propose any new techniques for training language models but provides insights into how these models acquire and represent formal meaning. The findings have implications for natural language processing tasks such as question answering, dialogue systems, and machine translation.

• - Language models can learn meaning despite being trained only for next token prediction on text.
• - The authors train a Transformer model on a corpus of programs, each preceded by input-output examples.
• - This approach enables precise definition of concepts relevant to meaning in language, such as correctness and semantics.
• - The authors probe the trained model's hidden states as it completes a program given a specification and find that a linear probe is able to extract abstractions of both current and future program states from the model states.
• - There is a strong correlation between the accuracy of the probe and the model's ability to generate a program that implements the specification.
• - The authors design an experimental procedure which intervenes on the semantics of language while preserving syntax and lexicon to evaluate whether semantics are represented in model states rather than learned by the probe.
• - The authors demonstrate that their model learns to generate correct programs which are shorter than those in training set; this suggests that language model outputs may differ from training distribution in semantically meaningful ways.
• - The paper provides insights into how language models acquire and represent formal meaning, with implications for natural language processing tasks such as question answering, dialogue systems, and machine translation.

This is a study about how computers can learn to understand language. The researchers taught a computer program called Transformer by giving it examples of what the correct output should be for different inputs. They found that the computer was able to understand the meaning of words and phrases, not just predict what comes next in a sentence. They also tested the computer's ability to create new programs based on specific instructions, and found that it could do so accurately. This research can help improve things like answering questions or translating languages with computers. Definitions- Language models: Computer programs that try to understand human language. - Corpus: A collection of written texts used for research. - Semantics: The meaning behind words and phrases. - Linear probe: A way of testing what information a computer program has learned. - Syntax: The rules for how words are put together in a sentence. - Lexicon: The vocabulary or words used in a language.

Evidence of Meaning in Language Models Trained on Programs

In their paper titled "Evidence of Meaning in Language Models Trained on Programs," Charles Jin and Martin Rinard present evidence that language models can learn meaning despite being trained only to perform next token prediction on text. This research has implications for natural language processing tasks such as question answering, dialogue systems, and machine translation. In this article, we will discuss the authors' approach to training a Transformer model on a corpus of programs, the findings from probing the model's hidden states, and how these findings suggest that language models may be able to acquire formal meaning.

Training a Model on Programs

The authors train a Transformer model on a corpus of programs preceded by specifications in the form of input-output examples. This approach enables them to precisely define concepts relevant to meaning in language such as correctness and semantics. Program synthesis is well-suited as an intermediate testbed for characterizing the presence or absence of meaning in language models because it provides access to both syntax and semantics which are necessary for understanding natural languages.

Probing Hidden States

To evaluate whether meaningful abstractions have been learned by the model, they probe its hidden states while completing a program given its specification. They find that linear probes are able to extract abstractions of both current and future program states from these hidden states with accuracy correlated with the ability of the model to generate correct programs shorter than those seen during training - suggesting that outputs may differ from training distribution in semantically meaningful ways.

Intervening on Semantics

To further investigate whether semantics are represented in model states rather than learned by linear probes, they design an experimental procedure which intervenes on semantics while preserving syntax and lexicon. The results show that their model learns to generate correct programs which implement specifications correctly - indicating that some level of semantic understanding has been acquired by the trained language model without any explicit instruction about what constitutes semantic knowledge or how it should be used when generating output sequences.

Conclusion

Overall, this paper does not propose any new techniques for training language models but provides insights into how these models acquire and represent formal meaning through probing their hidden states when completing tasks involving input-output examples specified using natural languages such as English or Chinese. These findings have implications for natural language processing tasks such as question answering, dialogue systems, and machine translation since they suggest that even without explicit instruction about what constitutes semantic knowledge or how it should be used when generating output sequences;language models can still learn enough information about meanings embedded within text data sets so as to produce semantically accurate outputs different from those seen during training time .