» Articles » PMID: 38014759

Unraveling Lexical Semantics in the Brain: Comparing Internal, External, and Hybrid Language Models

Overview
Journal Hum Brain Mapp
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Neurology
Date 2023 Nov 28
PMID 38014759
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To explain how the human brain represents and organizes meaning, many theoretical and computational language models have been proposed over the years, varying in their underlying computational principles and in the language samples based on which they are built. However, how well they capture the neural encoding of lexical semantics remains elusive. We used representational similarity analysis (RSA) to evaluate to what extent three models of different types explained neural responses elicited by word stimuli: an External corpus-based word2vec model, an Internal free word association model, and a Hybrid ConceptNet model. Semantic networks were constructed using word relations computed in the three models and experimental stimuli were selected through a community detection procedure. The similarity patterns between language models and neural responses were compared at the community, exemplar, and word node levels to probe the potential hierarchical semantic structure. We found that semantic relations computed with the Internal model provided the closest approximation to the patterns of neural activation, whereas the External model did not capture neural responses as well. Compared with the exemplar and the node levels, community-level RSA demonstrated the broadest involvement of brain regions, engaging areas critical for semantic processing, including the angular gyrus, superior frontal gyrus and a large portion of the anterior temporal lobe. The findings highlight the multidimensional semantic organization in the brain which is better captured by Internal models sensitive to multiple modalities such as word association compared with External models trained on text corpora.

Citing Articles

Causal Explanation from Mild Cognitive Impairment Progression using Graph Neural Networks.

Behnam A, Garg M, Liu X, Vassilaki M, St Sauver J, Petersen R Proceedings (IEEE Int Conf Bioinformatics Biomed). 2025; 2024:6349-6355.

PMID: 39926363 PMC: 11803575. DOI: 10.1109/bibm62325.2024.10822848.


A large-scale database of Mandarin Chinese word associations from the Small World of Words Project.

Li B, Ding Z, De Deyne S, Cai Q Behav Res Methods. 2024; 57(1):34.

PMID: 39739205 DOI: 10.3758/s13428-024-02513-1.


Greater neural pattern similarity to the native language is associated with better novel word learning.

Feng Y, Li A, Qu J, Li H, Liu X, Zhang J Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1456373.

PMID: 39698390 PMC: 11654073. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1456373.


Unraveling lexical semantics in the brain: Comparing internal, external, and hybrid language models.

Yang Y, Li L, De Deyne S, Li B, Wang J, Cai Q Hum Brain Mapp. 2023; 45(1):e26546.

PMID: 38014759 PMC: 10789206. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.26546.

References
1.
Martin A . GRAPES-Grounding representations in action, perception, and emotion systems: How object properties and categories are represented in the human brain. Psychon Bull Rev. 2015; 23(4):979-90. PMC: 5111803. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-015-0842-3. View

2.
Mack M, Preston A, Love B . Decoding the brain's algorithm for categorization from its neural implementation. Curr Biol. 2013; 23(20):2023-7. PMC: 3874407. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.08.035. View

3.
Epstein R, Harris A, Stanley D, Kanwisher N . The parahippocampal place area: recognition, navigation, or encoding?. Neuron. 1999; 23(1):115-25. DOI: 10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80758-8. View

4.
Lambon Ralph M, Jefferies E, Patterson K, Rogers T . The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2016; 18(1):42-55. DOI: 10.1038/nrn.2016.150. View

5.
Ashby F, Rosedahl L . A neural interpretation of exemplar theory. Psychol Rev. 2017; 124(4):472-482. PMC: 5481458. DOI: 10.1037/rev0000064. View