aiqbench analysis
This study challenges the assumption that larger language models inherently provide better predictions of human cognitive processes like reading time and fMRI data, revealing instead that predictive performance plateaus or degrades once model dimensionality is properly controlled. The findings suggest that beyond a few billion parameters, the specific training of these models adds negligible value over untrained counterparts for modeling human sentence processing, indicating a limit to how well current LLM architectures reflect human cognitive faculties.
Vectors from Larger Language Models Predict Human Reading Time and fMRI Data More Poorly when Dimensionality Expansion is Controlled
arXiv:2505.12196v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The impressive linguistic abilities of large language models (LLMs) have recommended them as models of human sentence processing, with some conjecturing a positive 'quality-power' relationship, in which language models' (LMs') fit to psychometric data continues to improve as their ability to predict words in context increases. This is important because it might suggest that elements of LLM architecture reflect the architecture of the human sentence processing faculty, and that any inadequacies in predicting human reading time and brain imaging data may be attributed to insufficient model complexity, which recedes as larger models become available. But recent studies have shown this scaling inverts after a point, as LMs become excessively large and accurate, when information-theoretic surprisal is used as a predictor. Other studies propose the use of entire vectors from differently sized LLMs, still showing positive scaling, casting doubt on the value of surprisal as a predictor, but do not control for dimensionality expansion using untrained LLMs with more than 1.6B parameters. This study evaluates scaling of LLM vector predictors controlled using untrained LLMs with up to 66B parameters. Results show that inverse scaling obtains, and moreover the contribution of trained LMs over corresponding untrained LMs drops to zero at around a few billion parameters on most datasets.
Abstract:The impressive linguistic abilities of large language models (LLMs) have recommended them as models of human sentence processing, with some conjecturing a positive 'quality-power' relationship, in which language models' (LMs') fit to psychometric data continues to improve as their ability to predict words in context increases. This is important because it might suggest that elements of LLM architecture reflect the architecture of the human sentence processing faculty, and that any inadequacies in predicting human reading time and brain imaging data may be attributed to insufficient model complexity, which recedes as larger models become available. But recent studies have shown this scaling inverts after a point, as LMs become excessively large and accurate, when information-theoretic surprisal is used as a predictor. Other studies propose the use of entire vectors from differently sized LLMs, still showing positive scaling, casting doubt on the value of surprisal as a predictor, but do not control for dimensionality expansion using untrained LLMs with more than 1.6B parameters. This study evaluates scaling of LLM vector predictors controlled using untrained LLMs with up to 66B parameters. Results show that inverse scaling obtains, and moreover the contribution of trained LMs over corresponding untrained LMs drops to zero at around a few billion parameters on most datasets.
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2505.12196 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2505.12196v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2505.12196 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 300 words
Related coverage
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · Jul 31, 2026
J++ Lens: Jacobian Filtering Enables More Faithful Workspace Lenses
LessWrong · Oct 8, 2026
Latent reasoning architectures would likely undermine CoT, our strongest oversight tool
AI Alignment Forum · Sep 23, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026