We present ZhoBLiMP, the largest linguistic minimal pair benchmark for Chinese, with over 100 paradigms, ranging from topicalization to the Ba construction. We then train from scratch a suite of Chinese language models (LMs) with different tokenizers, parameter sizes, and token volumes, to study the learning curves of LMs on Chinese. To mitigate the biases introduced by unequal lengths of the sentences in a minimal pair, we propose a new metric named sub-linear length normalized log-probabilities (SLLN-LP). Using SLLN-LP as the metric, our results show that Anaphor, Quantifiers, and Ellipsis in Chinese are difficult for LMs even up to 32B parameters, and that SLLN-LP successfully mitigates biases in ZhoBLiMP, JBLiMP and BLiMP. We conclude that future evaluations should be more carefully designed to consider the intricate relations between linking functions, LMs, and targeted minimal pairs.

We ask whether contemporary LLMs are able to perform natural language inference (NLI) tasks on mathematical texts. We call this the Math NLI problem. We construct a corpus of Math NLI pairs whose premises are from extant mathematical text and whose hypotheses and gold labels were provided by people with experience in both research-level mathematics and also in the NLI field. We also investigate the quality of corpora using the same premises but whose hypotheses are provided by LLMs themselves. We not only investigate the performance but also the inter-group consistency of the diverse group of LLMs. We have both positive and negative findings. Among our positive findings: in some settings, using a majority vote of LLMs is approximately equivalent to using human-labeled data in the Math NLI area. On the negative side: LLMs still struggle with mathematical language. They occasionally fail at even basic inferences. Current models are not as prone to hypothesis-only “inference” in our data the way the previous generation had been. In addition to our findings, we also provide our corpora as data to support future work on Math NLI.