What happens when generative AI models train recursively on each others' generated outputs?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.21677v2
• Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2025 18:34:02 GMT
• Title: What happens when generative AI models train recursively on each others' generated outputs?
• Authors: Hung Anh Vu, Galen Reeves, Emily Wenger,
• Abstract summary: We show that data-mediated interactions can benefit models by exposing them to novel concepts perhaps missed in original training data, but also can homogenize their performance on shared tasks.<n>We find that data-mediated interactions can benefit models by exposing them to novel concepts perhaps missed in original training data, but also can homogenize their performance on shared tasks.
• Score: 10.634199262199859
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The internet is full of AI-generated content while also serving as a common source of training data for generative AI (genAI) models. This duality raises the possibility that future genAI models may be trained on other models' generated outputs. Prior work has studied consequences of models training on their own generated outputs, but limited work has considered what happens if models ingest content produced by other models. Given society's increasing dependence on genAI tools, understanding downstream effects of such data-mediated model interactions is critical. To this end, we provide empirical evidence for how data-mediated interactions might unfold in practice, develop a theoretical model for this interactive training process, and show experimentally possible long-term results of such interactions. We find that data-mediated interactions can benefit models by exposing them to novel concepts perhaps missed in original training data, but also can homogenize their performance on shared tasks.

Related papers

• Unlocking the Potential of Past Research: Using Generative AI to Reconstruct Healthcare Simulation Models [0.0]
  This study explores the feasibility of using generative artificial intelligence (AI) to recreate published models using Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)<n>We successfully generated, tested and internally reproduced two DES models, including user interfaces.<n>The reported results were replicated for one model, but not the other, likely due to missing information on distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T16:10:02Z)
• Collapse or Thrive? Perils and Promises of Synthetic Data in a Self-Generating World [19.266191284270793]
  generative machine learning models are pretrained on web-scale datasets containing data generated by earlier models.<n>Some prior work warns of "model collapse" as the web is overwhelmed by synthetic data.<n>We report experiments on three ways of using data (training-workflows) across three generative model task-settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T05:49:24Z)
• Will the Inclusion of Generated Data Amplify Bias Across Generations in Future Image Classification Models? [29.71939692883025]
  We investigate the effects of generated data on image classification tasks, with a specific focus on bias. Hundreds of experiments are conducted on Colorized MNIST, CIFAR-20/100, and Hard ImageNet datasets. Our findings contribute to the ongoing debate on the implications of synthetic data for fairness in real-world applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T05:07:06Z)
• 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)
• Learning Defect Prediction from Unrealistic Data [57.53586547895278]
  Pretrained models of code have become popular choices for code understanding and generation tasks. Such models tend to be large and require commensurate volumes of training data. It has become popular to train models with far larger but less realistic datasets, such as functions with artificially injected bugs. Models trained on such data tend to only perform well on similar data, while underperforming on real world programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-02T01:51:43Z)
• Fantastic Gains and Where to Find Them: On the Existence and Prospect of General Knowledge Transfer between Any Pretrained Model [74.62272538148245]
  We show that for arbitrary pairings of pretrained models, one model extracts significant data context unavailable in the other. We investigate if it is possible to transfer such "complementary" knowledge from one model to another without performance degradation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:59:46Z)
• 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)
• Scaling Laws Do Not Scale [54.72120385955072]
  Recent work has argued that as the size of a dataset increases, the performance of a model trained on that dataset will increase. We argue that this scaling law relationship depends on metrics used to measure performance that may not correspond with how different groups of people perceive the quality of models' output. Different communities may also have values in tension with each other, leading to difficult, potentially irreconcilable choices about metrics used for model evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-05T15:32:21Z)

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.