Agent-based models for the evolution of morphological alternation patterns
Quick Answer
This study presents a multi-agent simulation exploring how morphological alternation patterns, like 'go' and 'went', emerge and persist in languages.
Quick Take
This study presents a multi-agent simulation exploring how morphological alternation patterns, like 'go' and 'went', emerge and persist in languages. Utilizing a novel AI Historical Linguist model, the research evaluates the realism of evolved morphologies against real languages, revealing that social network structures and random adoption significantly influence morphological plausibility.
Key Points
- The simulation allows for realistic phonological rules and large lexicons with thousands of entries.
- AI Historical Linguist compares real and evolved morphologies, enhancing evaluation methods.
- Scale-free social networks favor the emergence of plausible morphological forms.
- Three case studies model historical changes, testing alternative historical scenarios.
- All code and data from the study are publicly available.
Paper Resources
Article Content
From source RSS / original summaryarXiv:2606. 12748v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Why is the past of English "go" the apparently unrelated "went"? Such alternations are frequent in languages. They neither aid communication nor learnability, yet they can be persistent, surviving over centuries or millennia. We present a multi-agent simulation of the emergence of morphological stem and inflection alternations. Alternate forms arise by phonological changes or, as with "go/went", from lexical alternatives associated with a subset of the population.
When an agent 'hears' another agent use a novel form for a slot in the paradigm of a word (say, the past tense of go), they will with some probability adopt that form, possibly spreading its use to other slots in the paradigm that shared the same original form. Thus alternative forms can spread through the population and become entrenched as stem or inflectional marker alternants.
Unlike many previous computational studies, our system allows for naturalistic lexical forms, realistic phonological rules, lexicons with hundreds or thousands of entries, and agent populations in the tens or hundreds. It supports several network topologies, diffusion patterns and agent adoption policies. One issue with such simulations is evaluation: how realistic is the resulting morphology compared to those of real languages?
We introduce the AI Historical Linguist, a novel Large Language Model-driven system that models a debate between two historical linguists. We use this to compare a set of real language morphologies, disguised morphologies, and experimentally evolved morphologies. The results suggest that among the factors that favor more plausible morphologies are scale-free social networks and random Bernoulli adoption of forms.
We also present three case studies modeling attested historical changes, allowing us to test what might have happened if history had been different. All code and data are released.
Reader Mode unavailable (could not extract clean content).
Want this in your inbox every morning?
Daily brief at your local 8am — bilingual EN/中文, free.
More from arXiv cs.CL
See more →Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents?
The REFLECT benchmark reveals that current LLM judges are unreliable, achieving below 55% accuracy in evaluating reasoning and evidence use, highlighting the need for improved evaluation methods for deep research agents.