Abstract
Finding and facilitating commonalities between the linguistic behaviors oflarge language models and humans could lead to major breakthroughs in ourunderstanding of the acquisition, processing, and evolution of language.However, most findings on human--LLM similarity can be attributed to trainingon human data. The field of emergent machine to-machine communication providesan ideal testbed for discovering which pressures are neural agents naturallyexposed to when learning to communicate in isolation, without any humanlanguage to start with. Here, we review three cases where mismatches betweenthe emergent linguistic behavior of neural agents and humans were resolvedthanks to introducing theoretically-motivated inductive biases. By contrastinghumans, large language models, and emergent communication agents, we thenidentify key pressures at play for language learning and emergence:communicative success, production effort, learnability, and otherpsycho-/sociolinguistic factors. We discuss their implications and relevance tothe field of language evolution and acquisition. By mapping out the necessaryinductive biases that make agents' emergent languages more human-like, we notonly shed light on the underlying principles of human cognition andcommunication, but also inform and improve the very use of these models asvaluable scientific tools for studying language learning, processing, use, andrepresentation more broadly.