Is Model Collapse Inevitable? Breaking the Curse of Recursion by Accumulating Real and Synthetic Data

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01413v2
• Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 23:13:42 GMT
• Title: Is Model Collapse Inevitable? Breaking the Curse of Recursion by Accumulating Real and Synthetic Data
• Authors: Matthias Gerstgrasser, Rylan Schaeffer, Apratim Dey, Rafael Rafailov, Henry Sleight, John Hughes, Tomasz Korbak, Rajashree Agrawal, Dhruv Pai, Andrey Gromov, Daniel A. Roberts, Diyi Yang, David L. Donoho, Sanmi Koyejo,
• Abstract summary: We show that replacing the original real data by each generation's synthetic data does indeed tend towards model collapse. We demonstrate that accumulating the successive generations of synthetic data alongside the original real data avoids model collapse.
• Score: 49.73114504515852
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The proliferation of generative models, combined with pretraining on web-scale data, raises a timely question: what happens when these models are trained on their own generated outputs? Recent investigations into model-data feedback loops proposed that such loops would lead to a phenomenon termed model collapse, under which performance progressively degrades with each model-data feedback iteration until fitted models become useless. However, those studies largely assumed that new data replace old data over time, where an arguably more realistic assumption is that data accumulate over time. In this paper, we ask: what effect does accumulating data have on model collapse? We empirically study this question by pretraining sequences of language models on text corpora. We confirm that replacing the original real data by each generation's synthetic data does indeed tend towards model collapse, then demonstrate that accumulating the successive generations of synthetic data alongside the original real data avoids model collapse; these results hold across a range of model sizes, architectures, and hyperparameters. We obtain similar results for deep generative models on other types of real data: diffusion models for molecule conformation generation and variational autoencoders for image generation. To understand why accumulating data can avoid model collapse, we use an analytically tractable framework introduced by prior work in which a sequence of linear models are fit to the previous models' outputs. Previous work used this framework to show that if data are replaced, the test error increases with the number of model-fitting iterations; we extend this argument to prove that if data instead accumulate, the test error has a finite upper bound independent of the number of iterations, meaning model collapse no longer occurs.

Related papers

• Universality of the $π^2/6$ Pathway in Avoiding Model Collapse [0.0]
  We demonstrate the universality of the pi-squared-over-6 augment risk bound across a large family of canonical statistical models. We provide a framework that is able to accommodate a large variety of augment processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T08:44:10Z)
• Collapse or Thrive? Perils and Promises of Synthetic Data in a Self-Generating World [19.266191284270793]
  We study collapse versus avoidance of collapse when generative machine learning models are pretrained on web-scale datasets. Surprisingly, we find a non-trivial interaction between real and synthetic data, where the value of synthetic data for reducing test loss depends on the absolute quantity of real data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T05:49:24Z)
• Self-Consuming Generative Models with Curated Data Provably Optimize Human Preferences [20.629333587044012]
  We study the impact of data curation on iterated retraining of generative models. We prove that, if the data is curated according to a reward model, the expected reward of the iterative retraining procedure is maximized.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-12T21:28:28Z)
• How Bad is Training on Synthetic Data? A Statistical Analysis of Language Model Collapse [9.59833542807268]
  Model collapse occurs when new models are trained on synthetic data generated from previously trained models. We show that model collapse cannot be avoided when training solely on synthetic data. We estimate a maximal amount of synthetic data below which model collapse can eventually be avoided.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-07T22:15:13Z)
• Heat Death of Generative Models in Closed-Loop Learning [63.83608300361159]
  We study the learning dynamics of generative models that are fed back their own produced content in addition to their original training dataset. We show that, unless a sufficient amount of external data is introduced at each iteration, any non-trivial temperature leads the model to degenerate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T21:51:39Z)
• Towards Theoretical Understandings of Self-Consuming Generative Models [56.84592466204185]
  This paper tackles the emerging challenge of training generative models within a self-consuming loop. We construct a theoretical framework to rigorously evaluate how this training procedure impacts the data distributions learned by future models. We present results for kernel density estimation, delivering nuanced insights such as the impact of mixed data training on error propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T02:08:09Z)
• On the Stability of Iterative Retraining of Generative Models on their own Data [56.153542044045224]
  We study the impact of training generative models on mixed datasets. We first prove the stability of iterative training under the condition that the initial generative models approximate the data distribution well enough. We empirically validate our theory on both synthetic and natural images by iteratively training normalizing flows and state-of-the-art diffusion models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-30T16:41:04Z)
• Variational Bayesian Unlearning [54.26984662139516]
  We study the problem of approximately unlearning a Bayesian model from a small subset of the training data to be erased. We show that it is equivalent to minimizing an evidence upper bound which trades off between fully unlearning from erased data vs. not entirely forgetting the posterior belief. In model training with VI, only an approximate (instead of exact) posterior belief given the full data can be obtained, which makes unlearning even more challenging.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-24T11:53:00Z)
• Data from Model: Extracting Data from Non-robust and Robust Models [83.60161052867534]
  This work explores the reverse process of generating data from a model, attempting to reveal the relationship between the data and the model. We repeat the process of Data to Model (DtM) and Data from Model (DfM) in sequence and explore the loss of feature mapping information. Our results show that the accuracy drop is limited even after multiple sequences of DtM and DfM, especially for robust models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-13T05:27:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.