The Curious Case of Neural Text Degeneration
Ari Holtzman, Jan Buys, Li Du, Maxwell Forbes, Yejin Choi
Abstract
Despite considerable advancements with deep neural language models, the enigma of neural text degeneration persists when these models are tested as text generators. The counter-intuitive empirical observation is that even though the use of likelihood as training objective leads to high quality models for a broad range of language understanding tasks, using likelihood as a decoding objective leads to text that is bland and strangely repetitive. In this paper, we reveal surprising distributional differences between human text and machine text. In addition, we find that decoding strategies alone can dramatically effect the quality of machine text, even when generated from exactly the same neural language model. Our findings motivate Nucleus Sampling, a simple but effective method to draw the best out of neural generation. By sampling text from the dynamic nucleus of the probability distribution, which allows for diversity while effectively truncating the less reliable tail of the distribution, the resulting text better demonstrates the quality of human text, yielding enhanced diversity without sacrificing fluency and coherence.
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.
Cited by top-tier papers1,114
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- BLIP: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training for Unified Vision-Language Understanding and GenerationJunnan Li, Dongxu Li, Caiming Xiong, Steven C. H. HoiICML 2022 · 6,549 citations
- QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMsTim Dettmers, Artidoro Pagnoni, Ari Holtzman, Luke ZettlemoyerNeurIPS 2023 · 5,863 citations
- Extracting Training Data from Large Language ModelsNicholas Carlini, Florian Tramèr, Eric Wallace, Matthew Jagielski et al.USENIX Security 2021 · 2,866 citations
- Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language ModelsAitor Lewkowycz, Anders Andreassen, David Dohan, Ethan Dyer et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 2,039 citations
Builds on2
Related papers
- Automatic Detection of Generated Text is Easiest when Humans are FooledDaphne Ippolito, Daniel Duckworth, Chris Callison-Burch, Douglas EckACL 2020 · 21 citations
- Language Model Evaluation Beyond PerplexityClara Meister, Ryan CotterellACL 2021
- A Contrastive Framework for Neural Text GenerationYixuan Su, Tian Lan, Yan Wang, Dani Yogatama et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 349 citations
- Closing the Curious Case of Neural Text DegenerationMatthew Finlayson, John Hewitt, Alexander Koller, Swabha Swayamdipta et al.ICLR 2024 · 31 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
