Papers › Sharp Nearby, Fuzzy Far Away: How Neural Language Models Use Context

Sharp Nearby, Fuzzy Far Away: How Neural Language Models Use Context

12 May 2018ACL 2018 7arXiv:1805.04623archive 2025-07-28

Urvashi Khandelwal, He He, Peng Qi, Dan Jurafsky

We know very little about how neural language models (LM) use prior linguistic context. In this paper, we investigate the role of context in an LSTM LM, through ablation studies. Specifically, we analyze the increase in perplexity when prior context words are shuffled, replaced, or dropped. On two standard datasets, Penn Treebank and WikiText-2, we find that the model is capable of using about 200 tokens of context on average, but sharply distinguishes nearby context (recent 50 tokens) from the distant history. The model is highly sensitive to the order of words within the most recent sentence, but ignores word order in the long-range context (beyond 50 tokens), suggesting the distant past is modeled only as a rough semantic field or topic. We further find that the neural caching model (Grave et al., 2017b) especially helps the LSTM to copy words from within this distant context. Overall, our analysis not only provides a better understanding of how neural LMs use their context, but also sheds light on recent success from cache-based models.

Code

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

11 samples harvested; 1 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 10 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 11 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 urvashik/lm-context-analysis. “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.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

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