Follow
Suhas Arehalli
Title
Cited by
Cited by
Year
Syntactic Surprisal From Neural Models Predicts, But Underestimates, Human Processing Difficulty From Syntactic Ambiguities
S Arehalli, B Dillon, T Linzen
arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.12187, 2022
362022
Neural language models capture some, but not all, agreement attraction effects
S Arehalli, T Linzen
PsyArXiv, 2020
172020
Surprisal does not explain syntactic disambiguation difficulty: evidence from a large-scale benchmark
KJ Huang, S Arehalli, M Kugemoto, C Muxica, G Prasad, B Dillon, ...
PsyArXiv, 2023
142023
Experimental filler design influences error correction rates in a word restoration paradigm
S Arehalli, E Wittenberg
Linguistics Vanguard 7 (1), 20200052, 2021
52021
SPR mega-benchmark shows surprisal tracks construction-but not item-level difficulty
KJ Huang, S Arehalli, M Kugemoto, C Muxica, G Prasad, B Dillon, ...
35th Annual Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Santa Cruz, California …, 2022
32022
Neural Networks Can Learn Patterns of Island-insensitivity in Norwegian
A Kobzeva, S Arehalli, T Linzen, D Kush
Proceedings of the Society for Computation in Linguistics 2023, 175-185, 2023
22023
LSTMs Can Learn Basic Wh-and Relative Clause Dependencies in Norwegian
A Kobzeva, S Arehalli, T Linzen, D Kush
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 44 (44), 2022
22022
Syntactic Intervention cannot explain agreement attraction in English wh-questions
S Arehalli, T Linzen, G Legendre
PsyArXiv, 2022
12022
Large-scale benchmark yields no evidence that language model surprisal explains syntactic disambiguation difficulty
KJ Huang, S Arehalli, M Kugemoto, C Muxica, G Prasad, B Dillon, ...
Journal of Memory and Language 137, 104510, 2024
2024
Syntactic intervention cannot explain agreement attraction in English Wh-questions
SA JHU, TL NYU, GL JHU
The system can't perform the operation now. Try again later.
Articles 1–10