arXiv subjects

Dan Pluth

Publications and source records attributed to Dan Pluth.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

The Holistic Storage of Verb+Up Phrases in Text-based and Audio-based Language Models

One of the most central aspects of language processing is the ability to trade off between stored representations and abstract knowledge: one must retrieve stored representations, but also generate novel ones by applying productive rules. While recent work has examined abstract knowledge in language models, holistic storage has received far less attention. We probe internal representations in both text-based LLMs and an ASR model, testing whether V+up phrasal verbs develop distinct representations as a function of frequency and predictability. All models show evidence of holistic storage driven by frequency and predictability, further supporting usage-based theories of language.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

On the Interpretability of Whisper Encodings Using Sparse Autoencoders

While deep transformer-based models have advanced rapidly, their internal mechanisms remain largely a mystery. Recent work has prioritized understanding text-based transformer models, leaving ASR systems largely unexplored. In order to address this gap, we examine the internal representations of Whisper's encoder using a sparse autoencoder. We find diverse monosemantic features across linguistic and non-linguistic boundaries, spanning a hierarchy from phonetic to semantic representations, and conduct a causal feature-steering campaign across this hierarchy, including cross-lingual steering. We further find that steering is more reliable for higher-level features than lower-level ones, an asymmetry that may reflect redundant encoding of lower-level information. Altogether, this work demonstrates that Whisper's encoder represents a surprisingly rich hierarchy of linguistic information that extends well beyond what is strictly necessary for transcription.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

How susceptible are LLMs to Logical Fallacies?

This paper investigates the rational thinking capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in multi-round argumentative debates by exploring the impact of fallacious arguments on their logical reasoning performance. More specifically, we present Logic Competence Measurement Benchmark (LOGICOM), a diagnostic benchmark to assess the robustness of LLMs against logical fallacies. LOGICOM involves two agents: a persuader and a debater engaging in a multi-round debate on a controversial topic, where the persuader tries to convince the debater of the correctness of its claim. First, LOGICOM assesses the potential of LLMs to change their opinions through reasoning. Then, it evaluates the debater's performance in logical reasoning by contrasting the scenario where the persuader employs logical fallacies against one where logical reasoning is used. We use this benchmark to evaluate the performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 using a dataset containing controversial topics, claims, and reasons supporting them. Our findings indicate that both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can adjust their opinion through reasoning. However, when presented with logical fallacies, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are erroneously convinced 41% and 69% more often, respectively, compared to when logical reasoning is used. Finally, we introduce a new dataset containing over 5k pairs of logical vs. fallacious arguments. The source code and dataset of this work are made publicly available.

cs.CL↗