Contextual and unigram surprisal are standard predictors of reading time in computational psycholinguistics. While contextual surprisal is typically derived from neural language models, unigram surprisal is usually obtained from independent corpus counts. Although both quantities are deterministic functionals of a single underlying distribution—capturing conditional and marginal structure respectively—this practice breaks their probabilistic link and may introduce estimation error from the mismatch. We propose three principles for estimating unigram surprisal in psycholinguistic research, including the requirement that both quantities be derived from the same language model. We operationalize this principle by introducing a Monte Carlo estimator of unigram surprisal from a language model, along with a marginalized variant that has lower variance empirically. When unigram surprisal is re-estimated under this unified framework, we find evidence that predictors change in their predictive contribution to reading time. We also confirm prior findings that frequency can be a stronger predictor of processing effort than contextual surprisal under this unified framework.

Although language is predominantly spoken, empirical tests of surprisal theory rely almost entirely on written text. In practice, surprisal is estimated using language models (LMs) trained on text and applied to transcriptions, creating a text bottleneck that limits evaluation of the theory in the spoken modality. We remove this bottleneck by estimating surprisal directly from the speech signal using a speech LM. This raises a key question: should surprisal be defined over realization-specific acoustic inputs or over abstract linguistic units? Since a single unit can have many distinct acoustic realizations, each assigned a different probability by the model, defining surprisal over abstract units is difficult. To address this, we introduce an importance sampling estimator that approximates the probability of an abstract unit by marginalizing over realizations generated by a text-to-speech model. Using pupillometry data from a listening study, we evaluate surprisal theory in this text-free setting at multiple levels of granularity. Obtaining surprisal from several speech LMs, we consistently find that surprisal estimated via importance sampling better predicts pupil dilation than realization-specific surprisal for words. We also find that surprisal values for sub-lexical units are predictive of pupil dilation. While we find that surprisal can be estimated without recourse to text, and that marginalizing over distinct realizations of words is more predictive of lexical processing effort, surprisal as a whole is not a strong predictor of change in pupil size, regardless of its source.

Probing has shown that language model representations encode rich linguistic information, but it remains unclear whether they also capture cognitive signals about human processing. In this work, we probe language model representations for human reading times. Using regularized linear regression on two eye-tracking corpora spanning five languages (English, Greek, Hebrew, Russian, and Turkish), we compare the representations from every model layer against scalar predictors—surprisal, information value, and logit-lens surprisal. We find that the representations from early layers outperform surprisal in predicting early-pass measures such as first fixation and gaze duration. The concentration of predictive power in the early layers suggests that human-like processing signatures are captured by low-level structural or lexical representations, pointing to a functional alignment between model depth and the temporal stages of human reading. In contrast, for late-pass measures such as total reading time, scalar surprisal remains superior, despite its being a much more compressed representation. We also observe performance gains when using both surprisal and early-layer representations. Overall, we find that the best-performing predictor varies strongly depending on the language and eye-tracking measure.

Surprisal theory links human processing effort to the predictability of an upcoming linguistic unit, but empirical work often leaves the notion of a unit underspecified. In practice, experimental stimuli are segmented into linguistically motivated units (e.g., words), while pretrained language models assign probability mass to a fixed token alphabet that typically does not align with those units. As a result, surprisal-based predictors depend implicitly on ad hoc procedures that conflate two distinct modeling choices: the definition of the unit of analysis and the choice of regions of interest over which predictions are evaluated. In this paper, we disentangle these choices and give a unified framework for reasoning about surprisal over arbitrary unit inventories. We argue that surprisal-based analyses should make these choices explicit and treat tokenization as an implementation detail rather than a scientific primitive.

The uniform information density (UID) hypothesis proposes that speakers aim to distribute information evenly throughout a text, balancing production effort and listener comprehension difficulty. However, language typically does not maintain a strictly uniform information rate; instead, it fluctuates around a global average. These fluctuations are often explained by factors such as syntactic constraints, stylistic choices, or audience design. In this work, we explore an alternative perspective: that these fluctuations may be influenced by an implicit linguistic pressure towards periodicity, where the information rate oscillates at regular intervals, potentially across multiple frequencies simultaneously. We apply harmonic regression and introduce a novel extension called time scaling to detect and test for such periodicity in information contours. Analyzing texts in English, Spanish, German, Dutch, Basque, and Brazilian Portuguese, we find consistent evidence of periodic patterns in information rate. Many dominant frequencies align with discourse structure, suggesting these oscillations reflect meaningful linguistic organization. Beyond highlighting the connection between information rate and discourse structure, our approach offers a general framework for uncovering structural pressures at various levels of linguistic granularity.

Numerous previous studies have sought to determine to what extent language models, pretrained on natural language text, can serve as useful models of human cognition.In this paper, we are interested in the opposite question: whether we can directly optimize a language model to be a useful cognitive model by aligning it to human psychometric data.To achieve this, we introduce a novel alignment technique in which we fine-tune a language model to implicitly optimize the parameters of a linear regressor that directly predicts humans’ reading times of in-context linguistic units, e.g., phonemes, morphemes, or words, using surprisal estimates derived from the language model. Using words as a test case, we evaluate our technique across multiple model sizes and datasets and find that it improves language models’ psychometric predictive power.However, we find an inverse relationship between psychometric power and a model’s performance on downstream NLP tasks as well as its perplexity on held-out test data.While this latter trend has been observed before (Oh et al., 2022; Shain et al., 2024), we are the first to induce it by manipulating a model’s alignment to psychometric data.

Policy gradient algorithms have found wide adoption in NLP, but have recently become subject to criticism, doubting their suitability for NMT. Choshen et al. (2020) identify multiple weaknesses and suspect that their success is determined by the shape of output distributions rather than the reward. In this paper, we revisit these claims and study them under a wider range of configurations. Our experiments on in-domain and cross-domain adaptation reveal the importance of exploration and reward scaling, and provide empirical counter-evidence to these claims.