ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Symbol ungrounding: what the successes (and failures) of large language models reveal about human cognition.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- ISEED: an always-on cognitive architecture for experience-driven interaction-oriented humanoid robots.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2026Article
- Large language models without grounding recover non-sensorimotor but not sensorimotor features of human concepts.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Minds in movement: embodied cognition in the age of artificial intelligence.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large language models can handle sophisticated natural language processing tasks. This raises the question of how their understanding of semantic meaning compares to that of human beings. Supporters of embodied cognition often point out that because these models are trained solely on text, their representations of semantic content are not grounded in sensorimotor experience. This paper contends that human cognition exhibits capabilities that fit with both the embodied and artificial intelligence approaches. Evidence suggests that semantic memory is partially grounded in sensorimotor systems and dependent on language-specific learning. From this perspective, large language models demonstrate the richness of language as a source of semantic information. They show how our experience with language might scaffold and extend our capacity to make sense of the world. In the context of an embodied mind, language provides access to a valuable form of ungrounded cognition.This article is part of the theme issue 'Minds in movement: embodied cognition in the age of artificial intelligence'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.