If beam search is the answer, what was the question?
Clara Meister, Ryan Cotterell, Tim Vieira
Abstract
Quite surprisingly, exact maximum a posteriori (MAP) decoding of neural language generators frequently leads to low-quality results (Stahlberg and Byrne, 2019). Rather, most state-of-the-art results on language generation tasks are attained using beam search despite its overwhelmingly high search error rate. This implies that the MAP objective alone does not express the properties we desire in text, which merits the question: if beam search is the answer, what was the question? We frame beam search as the exact solution to a different decoding objective in order to gain insights into why high probability under a model alone may not indicate adequacy. We find that beam search enforces uniform information density in text, a property motivated by cognitive science. We suggest a set of decoding objectives that explicitly enforce this property and find that exact decoding with these objectives alleviates the problems encountered when decoding poorly calibrated language generation models. Additionally, we analyze the text produced using various decoding strategies and see that, in our neural machine translation experiments, the extent to which this property is adhered to strongly correlates with BLEU.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext c4d0ecc7-19f1-453f-97a7-4e8d62cf7c15Cited by top-tier papers37
- Offline Reinforcement Learning as One Big Sequence Modeling ProblemMichael Janner, Qiyang Li, Sergey LevineNeurIPS 2021 · 950 citations
- Lift Yourself Up: Retrieval-augmented Text Generation with Self-MemoryXin Cheng, Di Luo, Xiuying Chen, Lemao Liu et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 177 citations
- Grounded Decoding: Guiding Text Generation with Grounded Models for Embodied AgentsWenlong Huang, Fei Xia, Dhruv Shah, Danny Driess et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 102 citations
- A Well-Composed Text is Half Done! Composition Sampling for Diverse Conditional GenerationShashi Narayan, Gonçalo Simões, Yao Zhao, Joshua Maynez et al.ACL 2022 · 35 citations
- Closing the Curious Case of Neural Text DegenerationMatthew Finlayson, John Hewitt, Alexander Koller, Swabha Swayamdipta et al.ICLR 2024 · 31 citations
Builds on1
Related papers
- A Cognitive Regularizer for Language ModelingJason Wei, Clara Meister, Ryan CotterellACL 2021
- Machine Translation Decoding beyond Beam SearchRémi Leblond, Jean-Baptiste Alayrac, Laurent Sifre, Miruna Pislar et al.EMNLP 2021 · 6 citations
- A Contrastive Framework for Neural Text GenerationYixuan Su, Tian Lan, Yan Wang, Dani Yogatama et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 349 citations
- Enabling Arbitrary Translation Objectives with Adaptive Tree SearchWang Ling, Wojciech Stokowiec, Domenic Donato, Chris Dyer et al.ICLR 2022
- Entropy-informed Decoding: Adaptive Information-Driven BranchingBenjamin Patrick Evans, Sumitra Ganesh, Leo ArdonICML 2026
