Training Neural Networks as Recognizers of Formal Languages

Characterizing the computational power of neural network architectures in terms of formal language theory remains a crucial line of research, as it describes lower and upper bounds on the reasoning capabilities of modern AI. However, when empirically testing these bounds, existing work often leaves...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inarXiv.org
Main Authors Butoi, Alexandra, Ghazal Khalighinejad, Svete, Anej, Valvoda, Josef, Cotterell, Ryan, DuSell, Brian
Format Paper
LanguageEnglish
Published Ithaca Cornell University Library, arXiv.org 11.11.2024
Subjects
Algorithms
Asymptotic methods
Language
Languages
Modelling
Neural networks
Recognition
Recurrent neural networks
Strings
Upper bounds
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Characterizing the computational power of neural network architectures in terms of formal language theory remains a crucial line of research, as it describes lower and upper bounds on the reasoning capabilities of modern AI. However, when empirically testing these bounds, existing work often leaves a discrepancy between experiments and the formal claims they are meant to support. The problem is that formal language theory pertains specifically to recognizers: machines that receive a string as input and classify whether it belongs to a language. On the other hand, it is common to instead use proxy tasks that are similar in only an informal sense, such as language modeling or sequence-to-sequence transduction. We correct this mismatch by training and evaluating neural networks directly as binary classifiers of strings, using a general method that can be applied to a wide variety of languages. As part of this, we extend an algorithm recently proposed by Snæbjarnarson et al. (2024) to do length-controlled sampling of strings from regular languages, with much better asymptotic time complexity than previous methods. We provide results on a variety of languages across the Chomsky hierarchy for three neural architectures: a simple RNN, an LSTM, and a causally-masked transformer. We find that the RNN and LSTM often outperform the transformer, and that auxiliary training objectives such as language modeling can help, although no single objective uniformly improves performance across languages and architectures. Our contributions will facilitate theoretically sound empirical testing of language recognition claims in future work. We have released our datasets as a benchmark called FLaRe (Formal Language Recognition), along with our code.
ISSN:2331-8422