Pundit ClaimsAI claims by Gary Marcus and Ed Zitron, with the evidence

“Compositionality has long been a central concept in linguistics and philosophy (even Aristotle acknowledged it), yet so-called foundation models (large language models, GPT-3, BERT, deep learning approaches) sidestep it.”

Three ideas from linguistics that everyone in AI should know, paragraph 41. The full statement is at the source.

Our reading, the sentence that was checked:

Foundation models such as GPT-3 and BERT sidestep compositionality.

Assessment: Unresolved Evidence as of

Where and when Gary Marcus wrote it

Marcus on AI, Three ideas from linguistics that everyone in AI should know, paragraph 41.

Said
Source observed
live page, full text, public
Evidence as of
the cutoff for this assessment
Assessment recorded
assessment marcus-three-ideas-from-linguistics-that-42e048-a2

We recorded 26 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.

The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-29. The source may have been edited after 2022-06-22. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.

What the claim commits to

Kind
Observation
Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
None stated. This site does not add one.
Deadline state when assessed
No horizon
Deadline state on 2026-10-29
No horizon (the release’s reference date)

From the speaker

  • foundation models
  • large language models, GPT-3, BERT, deep learning approaches
  • sidestep it
  • Compositionality

Our interpretation

  • In the surrounding examples, the ordinary behavioral reading is that these models do not reliably preserve the meanings of parts and their arrangement when interpreting novel combinations.
  • This reading does not equate the absence of a hand-coded semantic module with the absence of learned compositional ability.
  • Sidestep could instead describe architecture or training objectives; those readings are recorded separately rather than silently substituted.
  • Current models are assessed over the current calendar year through publication, 2022-01-01 to 2022-06-22, because model evaluations have no regular reporting period.
  • The assessment addresses the normalized proposition about foundation models, not the historical aside about Aristotle.

Counts as supported if: Representative evaluations of contemporary foundation models establish systematic failure to preserve part meanings and their relations across novel combinations.

Counts as contradicted if: Representative evaluations of contemporary foundation models establish reliable compositional interpretation across controlled novel combinations. A narrow task success qualifies an absolute dismissal but does not alone establish general reliability.

Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.

Current assessment

Was it true for the period described?

Outcome: Unresolved

The record was checked, and the evidence available by the cutoff does not settle it.

Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.

Evidence as of
Deadline state when assessed
No horizon
Assessment recorded
Policy version
2026-10-28.7

Rationale

A May 2022 evaluation reported that all tested models failed its composition tasks in zero-shot conditions [e1]. Another May 2022 study reported 99.7% accuracy for code-davinci-002 on SCAN using least-to-most prompting, demonstration examples, Python notation and postprocessing [e2]. These results establish weaknesses without examples and success in one assisted setting, but do not settle compositional reliability across foundation models [e1, e2].

Limitations

  • The studies use different tasks and assistance levels, preventing a direct comparison [e1, e2].
  • Neither study establishes general reliability or general failure across the named models and compositional phenomena [e1, e2].
  • These behavioral results do not settle an architectural interpretation of 'sidestep'.

Evidence (2 items)

  • Supports the claim: Lialin et al., ACL 2022 / arXiv,

    fail on composition tasks

    Why it matters here: The tested pretrained models showed important compositional weaknesses without task examples. The paper also reports strong improvements after fine-tuning, so the result supports a reliability concern rather than an absence of all compositional capacity.

    Publisher
    Lialin et al., ACL 2022 / arXiv
    Kind of source
    Peer-reviewed paper
    Describes events of
    Public from
  • Context only: Zhou et al., arXiv,

    least-to-most prompting achieves an accuracy of 99.7%.

    Why it matters here: A contemporary GPT-3 model performed strongly on SCAN's length generalization split using structured decomposition prompts, Python notation and postprocessing. This materially challenges an absolute dismissal, but the narrow, assisted setup does not settle general compositional reliability.

    Publisher
    Zhou et al., arXiv
    Kind of source
    Preprint, not peer reviewed
    Describes events of
    Public from

What would settle it

Representative controlled evaluations of models available during January 1–June 22, 2022, testing held-out compositional combinations with specified model versions, prompting, fine-tuning and reliability criteria.

Where it was said (1)

Said once in the sources this register covers.

  • : Marcus on AI, Three ideas from linguistics that everyone in AI should know

    Compositionality has long been a central concept in linguistics and philosophy (even Aristotle acknowledged it), yet so-called foundation models (large language models, GPT-3, BERT, deep learning approaches) sidestep it.

    Published
    2022-06-22
    Source observed
    , live page
    Access
    full text, public

History

Assessment versions

Recorded events

  1. Assessment publishedBy this site

    First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.

    About assessment marcus-three-ideas-from-linguistics-that-42e048-a2.