Lune

EMNLP Findings2020

How Decoding Strategies Affect the Verifiability of Generated Text

Luca Massarelli, Fabio Petroni, Aleksandra Piktus, Myle Ott, Tim Rocktäschel, Vassilis Plachouras, Fabrizio Silvestri, Sebastian Riedel

Abstract

Recent progress in pre-trained language models led to systems that are able to generate text of an increasingly high quality. While several works have investigated the fluency and grammatical correctness of such models, it is still unclear to which extent the generated text is consistent with factual world knowledge. Here, we go beyond fluency and also investigate the verifiability of text generated by stateof-the-art pre-trained language models. A generated sentence is verifiable if it can be corroborated or disproved by Wikipedia, and we find that the verifiability of generated text strongly depends on the decoding strategy. In particular, we discover a tradeoff between factuality (i.e., the ability of generating Wikipedia corroborated text) and repetitiveness. While decoding strategies such as top-k and nucleus sampling lead to less repetitive generations, they also produce less verifiable text. Based on these finding, we introduce a simple and effective decoding strategy which, in comparison to previously used decoding strategies, produces less repetitive and more verifiable text.

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · 11 top-tier papers that cite it · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Cited by top-tier papers11

  1. Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
  2. MAUVE: Measuring the Gap Between Neural Text and Human Text using Divergence FrontiersKrishna Pillutla, Swabha Swayamdipta, Rowan Zellers, John Thickstun et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 606 citations
  3. Autoregressive Search Engines: Generating Substrings as Document IdentifiersMichele Bevilacqua, Giuseppe Ottaviano, Patrick Lewis, Scott Yih et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 242 citations
  4. Autoregressive Entity RetrievalNicola De Cao, Gautier Izacard, Sebastian Riedel, Fabio PetroniICLR 2021 · 200 citations
  5. ZeroGen: Efficient Zero-shot Learning via Dataset GenerationJiacheng Ye, Jiahui Gao, Qintong Li, Hang Xu et al.EMNLP 2022 · 96 citations

Builds on2

  1. The Curious Case of Neural Text DegenerationAri Holtzman, Jan Buys, Li Du, Maxwell Forbes et al.ICLR 2020 · 4,112 citations
  2. Neural Text Generation With Unlikelihood TrainingSean Welleck, Ilia Kulikov, Stephen Roller, Emily Dinan et al.ICLR 2020 · 683 citations

Related papers

  1. Factuality Enhanced Language Models for Open-Ended Text GenerationNayeon Lee, Wei Ping, Peng Xu, Mostofa Patwary et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 318 citations
  2. Automatic Detection of Generated Text is Easiest when Humans are FooledDaphne Ippolito, Daniel Duckworth, Chris Callison-Burch, Douglas EckACL 2020 · 21 citations
  3. DSVD: Dynamic Self-Verify Decoding for Faithful Generation in Large Language ModelsYiQiu Guo, Yuchen Yang, Zhe Chen, Pingjie Wang et al.EMNLP 2025
  4. DoLa: Decoding by Contrasting Layers Improves Factuality in Large Language ModelsYung-Sung Chuang, Yujia Xie, Hongyin Luo, Yoon Kim et al.ICLR 2024 · 354 citations
  5. Mirostat: a Neural Text decoding Algorithm that directly controls perplexitySourya Basu, Govardana Sachitanandam Ramachandran, Nitish Shirish Keskar, Lav R. VarshneyICLR 2021 · 13 citations
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines