Papers › Analyzing analytical methods: The case of phonology in neural models of spoken language

Analyzing analytical methods: The case of phonology in neural models of spoken language

15 Apr 2020ACL 2020 6arXiv:2004.07070archive 2025-07-28

Grzegorz Chrupała, Bertrand Higy, Afra Alishahi

Given the fast development of analysis techniques for NLP and speech processing systems, few systematic studies have been conducted to compare the strengths and weaknesses of each method. As a step in this direction we study the case of representations of phonology in neural network models of spoken language. We use two commonly applied analytical techniques, diagnostic classifiers and representational similarity analysis, to quantify to what extent neural activation patterns encode phonemes and phoneme sequences. We manipulate two factors that can affect the outcome of analysis. First, we investigate the role of learning by comparing neural activations extracted from trained versus randomly-initialized models. Second, we examine the temporal scope of the activations by probing both local activations corresponding to a few milliseconds of the speech signal, and global activations pooled over the whole utterance. We conclude that reporting analysis results with randomly initialized models is crucial, and that global-scope methods tend to yield more consistent results and we recommend their use as a complement to local-scope diagnostic methods.

PaperPDFConference PDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2004.07070")

Code

Syntology Ran 5 of 6 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · violated contract; 2 ran · our draft was wrong.

By repository: official repository: 6 samples from 1 repository, 5 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

6 samples harvested; 5 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

2ran · honoured contract
1ran · violated contract
2ran · our draft was wrong
1unverified

Licence: 0 of the 6 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

good_alignment gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods/prepare.py official repository ran · violated contract MIT (permissive) · de1a270e914accbe · report
load_alignment gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods/prepare.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · 708c50f766cc356e · report
majority_binary gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods/analyze.py official repository ran · honoured contract fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 388d00d6f54e27cf · report
majority_multiclass gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods/analyze.py official repository ran · honoured contract fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 16cfc7c70c1d8c4f · report
make_indexer gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods/prepare.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong MIT (permissive) · 203eb74fe03dd23d · report
local_classifier gchrupala/analyzing-analytical-methods/analyze.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · 992f82f94d81d237 · report

Tasks

Diagnostic

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections