Neural representation of words within phrases: Temporal evolution of color-adjectives and object-nouns during simple composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In language, stored semantic representations of lexical items combine into an infinitude of complex expressions. While the neuroscience of composition has begun to mature, we do not yet understand how the stored representations evolve and morph during composition. New decoding techniques allow us to crack open this very hard question: we can train a model to recognize a representation in one context or time-point and assess its accuracy in another. We combined the decoding approach with magnetoencephalography recorded during a picture naming task to investigate the temporal evolution of noun and adjective representations during speech planning. We tracked semantic representations as they combined into simple two-word phrases, using single words and two-word lists as non-combinatory controls. We found that nouns were generally more decodable than adjectives, suggesting that noun representations were stronger and/or more consistent across trials than those of adjectives. When training and testing across contexts and times, the representations of isolated nouns were recoverable when those nouns were embedded in phrases, but not so if they were embedded in lists. Adjective representations did not show a similar consistency across isolated and phrasal contexts. Noun representations in phrases also sustained over time in a way that was not observed for any other pairing of word class and context. These findings offer a new window into the temporal evolution and context sensitivity of word representations during composition, revealing a clear asymmetry between adjectives and nouns. The impact of phrasal contexts on the decodability of nouns may be due to the nouns' status as head of phrase-an intriguing hypothesis for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".