Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
140 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

SequenceMatch: Imitation Learning for Autoregressive Sequence Modelling with Backtracking (2306.05426v3)

Published 8 Jun 2023 in cs.LG and cs.AI

Abstract: In many domains, autoregressive models can attain high likelihood on the task of predicting the next observation. However, this maximum-likelihood (MLE) objective does not necessarily match a downstream use-case of autoregressively generating high-quality sequences. The MLE objective weights sequences proportionally to their frequency under the data distribution, with no guidance for the model's behaviour out of distribution (OOD): leading to compounding error during autoregressive generation. In order to address this compounding error problem, we formulate sequence generation as an imitation learning (IL) problem. This allows us to minimize a variety of divergences between the distribution of sequences generated by an autoregressive model and sequences from a dataset, including divergences with weight on OOD generated sequences. The IL framework also allows us to incorporate backtracking by introducing a backspace action into the generation process. This further mitigates the compounding error problem by allowing the model to revert a sampled token if it takes the sequence OOD. Our resulting method, SequenceMatch, can be implemented without adversarial training or architectural changes. We identify the SequenceMatch-$\chi2$ divergence as a more suitable training objective for autoregressive models which are used for generation. We show that empirically, SequenceMatch training leads to improvements over MLE on text generation with LLMs and arithmetic.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (38)
  1. LS-IQ: Implicit reward regularization for inverse reinforcement learning. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023.
  2. Wasserstein generative adversarial networks. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 214–223. PMLR, 2017.
  3. Why Exposure Bias Matters: An Imitation Learning Perspective of Error Accumulation in Language Generation. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2022, pages 700–710, 2022.
  4. Adversarial soft advantage fitting: Imitation learning without policy optimization. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 33, pages 12334–12344, 2020.
  5. On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07258, 2021.
  6. JAX: Composable transformations of Python+NumPy programs{}, 2020.
  7. Language Models are Few-Shot Learners. arXiv:2005.14165 [cs], July 2020.
  8. Behavioural cloning in control of a dynamic system. In 1995 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Intelligent Systems for the 21st Century, volume 3, pages 2904–2909. IEEE, 1995.
  9. Hierarchical neural story generation. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 889–898, 2018.
  10. A theoretical analysis of the repetition problem in text generation. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 35, pages 12848–12856, 2021.
  11. IQ-Learn: Inverse soft-Q learning for imitation. In NeurIPS, 2021.
  12. Generative adversarial networks. Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2014.
  13. Flax: A neural network library and ecosystem for JAX, 2020.
  14. Generative adversarial imitation learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016.
  15. The curious case of neural text degeneration. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
  16. A Survey on Generative Adversarial Networks: Variants, Applications, and Training. arXiv:2006.05132 [cs], June 2020.
  17. A simple contrastive learning objective for alleviating neural text degeneration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.02517, 2022.
  18. Imitation learning via off-policy distribution matching. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
  19. Training Wasserstein GANs without gradient penalties. arXiv:2110.14150 [cs, math], October 2021.
  20. A Tutorial on Energy-Based Learning, 2006.
  21. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
  22. Playing Atari with Deep Reinforcement Learning, 2013.
  23. Algorithms for inverse reinforcement learning. In In Proc. 17th International Conf. on Machine Learning. Citeseer, 2000.
  24. MAUVE scores for generative models: Theory and practice. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.14578, 2022.
  25. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners, 2018.
  26. A fixed point theorem for the infinite-dimensional simplex. Journal of mathematical analysis and applications, 332(2):1063–1070, 2007.
  27. A reduction of imitation learning and structured prediction to no-regret online learning. In AISTATS, pages 627–635, 2011.
  28. Toward Diverse Text Generation with Inverse Reinforcement Learning. arXiv:1804.11258 [cs, stat], June 2018.
  29. Maurice Sion. On general minimax theorems. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 8(4):171–176, 1958.
  30. Generative modeling by estimating gradients of the data distribution. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 32, 2019.
  31. Score-Based Generative Modeling through Stochastic Differential Equations. arXiv:2011.13456 [cs, stat], February 2021.
  32. Of Moments and Matching: Trade-offs and Treatments in Imitation Learning. arXiv:2103.03236 [cs, stat], March 2021.
  33. Apprenticeship learning using linear programming. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 1032–1039, 2008.
  34. Shichang Tang. Lessons Learned from the Training of GANs on Artificial Datasets. arXiv:2007.06418 [cs, stat], July 2020.
  35. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 30, 2017.
  36. Scaling autoregressive video models. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020.
  37. Neural text generation with unlikelihood training. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
  38. Huggingface’s transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.03771, 2019.
Citations (6)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

  • The paper presents a novel imitation learning approach that reframes autoregressive sequence modeling as an IL problem, reducing error accumulation.
  • It introduces a backtracking mechanism that allows models to correct generated tokens on-the-fly, enhancing coherence and accuracy.
  • Empirical results show significant gains over traditional MLE training, evidenced by improved MAUVE scores and increased text diversity.

Imitation Learning Approach Enhances Autoregressive Sequence Modelling

Introduction to SequenceMatch

Recent advancements in autoregressive sequence modeling, especially within the domain of text generation, have shown promise across various applications, including machine translation, summarization, and creative writing assistance. A new method, SequenceMatch, introduces a novel approach that optimizes autoregressive models beyond traditional training objectives. Leveraging an imitation learning (IL) framework, SequenceMatch addresses the critical issues of compounding errors and out-of-distribution (OOD) token generation that often plague these models.

Key Innovations of SequenceMatch

SequenceMatch innovates in several crucial areas, presenting a comprehensive solution to longstanding challenges.

  • Transition to Imitation Learning: At its core, SequenceMatch formulates the sequence generation task as an IL problem. This paradigm shift allows for the minimization of divergences between occupancy measures, which represent the distribution of sequences produced by the model and those in the dataset.
  • Incorporating Backtracking: Uniquely, SequenceMatch integrates a backspace action into the generation process. This mechanism enables the model to backtrack from erroneously generated tokens, correcting its pathway to generate more coherent and contextually accurate sequences.
  • No Need for Adversarial Training: The implementation of SequenceMatch sidesteps the complexities of adversarial training methods. It relies on a non-adversarial IL objective, simplifying the training process and improving the robustness of model outputs.
  • SequenceMatch-χ Divergence: A significant contribution of this work is the identification of the SequenceMatch-χ divergence. This divergence criterion provides a more suitable objective for training autoregressive models focused on generation tasks.

Performance and Empirical Evaluation

The empirical evaluation of SequenceMatch demonstrates its effectiveness over the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) objective, a standard benchmark in autoregressive model training. SequenceMatch shows notable improvements in general text generation, evidenced by superior performance on metrics such as MAUVE score and diversity, indicating enhanced quality and variety in generated text.

Theoretical Contributions and Practical Implications

This work contributes significantly to both the theoretical understanding and practical application of autoregressive sequence models. The IL-based approach offers a new perspective on minimizing divergence between model and data distributions, with backtracking introducing a practical mechanism for error correction during generation. These advancements suggest promising avenues for developing more capable and reliable generation models across various domains.

Future Directions in AI and Sequence Modelling

The introduction of SequenceMatch paves the way for future research exploring the potential of IL in sequence modeling and beyond. Future work may investigate the scalability of the method to larger models, its applicability to other types of generative tasks, and further innovations in divergence criteria that could offer even greater improvements in generation quality. Additionally, the impact of backtracking and other error-correction mechanisms on model interpretability and control warrants further exploration.

Conclusion

SequenceMatch represents a significant step forward in the development of autoregressive sequence models, offering a novel training methodology that addresses key challenges in the field. By grounding sequence generation in the IL framework and introducing backtracking as a corrective mechanism, SequenceMatch transcends traditional training limitations, presenting a robust, non-adversarial approach to model optimization. This work opens new paths for research and application, promising substantial advancements in text generation and other sequence modeling applications.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

YouTube