Behavioural vs. Representational Systematicity in End-to-End Models An Opinionated Survey
| Authors |
|
|---|---|
| Publication date | 2025 |
| Host editors |
|
| Book title | The 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2025) : proceedings of the conference |
| Book subtitle | ACL 2025 : July 27-August 1, 2025 |
| ISBN (electronic) |
|
| Event | 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL 2025 |
| Volume | Issue number | 1 |
| Pages (from-to) | 31842–31856 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Publisher | Kerrville, TX: Association for Computational Linguistics |
| Organisations |
|
| Abstract |
A core aspect of compositionality, systematicity is a desirable property in ML models as it enables strong generalization to novel contexts. This has led to numerous studies proposing benchmarks to assess systematic generalization, as well as models and training regimes designed to enhance it. Many of these efforts are framed as addressing the challenge posed by Fodor and Pylyshyn. However, while they argue for systematicity of representations, existing benchmarks and models primarily focus on the systematicity of behaviour. We emphasize the crucial nature of this distinction. Furthermore, building on Hadley’s (1994) taxonomy of systematic generalization, we analyze the extent to which behavioural systematicity is tested by key benchmarks in the literature across language and vision. Finally, we highlight ways of assessing systematicity of representations in ML models as practiced in the field of mechanistic interpretability.
|
| Document type | Conference contribution |
| Language | English |
| Published at | https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.1537 |
| Downloads |
2025.acl-long.1537
(Final published version)
|
| Permalink to this page | |
