Calibration, Entropy Rates, and Memory in Language Models
Open accessAbstract
Building accurate language models that capture meaningful long-term dependencies is a core challenge in natural language processing. Towards this end, we present a calibration-based approach to measure long-term discrepancies between a generative sequence model and the true distribution, and use these discrepancies to improve the model. Empirically, we show that state-of-the-art language models, including LSTMs and Transformers, are \emph{miscalibrated}: the entropy rates of their generations drift dramatically upward over time. We then provide provable methods to mitigate this phenomenon. Furthermore, we show how this calibration-based approach can also be used to measure the amount of memory that language models use for prediction.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Simple post-hoc probability modification procedures can calibrate any uncalibrated predictor and simultaneously increase its accuracy under metrics such as cross-entropy.
“Simple post-hoc probability modification procedures can calibrate any uncalibrated predictor and simultaneously increase its accuracy under metrics such as cross-entropy [see, e.g., 7, 8].”
From Calibrated Language Models Must Hallucinate (2024) · cites this paper as [7]
Section 4.2 (p. 6) describes calibrating a language model while improving its perplexity, and Algorithm 2 (p. 8) fits a modified model by minimizing cross-entropy. The paper does not establish that these procedures calibrate any uncalibrated predictor: its results concern specified discrepancies in language models and are subject to stated assumptions. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe concept of calibration was introduced by Dawid and has been extensively studied in statistics, machine learning, and specifically for language models.
“As discussed in the introduction, the concept of calibration was introduced by Dawid [10] and has been extensively studied in statistics and machine learning and even specifically for LMs [7,17,38] and other related fields of deep learning and generative AI [21,28].”
From Calibrated Language Models Must Hallucinate (2024) · cites this paper as [7]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Transforming classifier scores into accurate multiclass probability estimates
Zadrozny, B., & Elkan, C. (2002) · Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/775047.775151 · Cited by 1,280 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- Giuliano Antoniol, Fabio Brugnara, Mauro Cettolo, and Marcello Federico. Language model representations for beam-search decoding. In 1995 International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing , volume 1, pages 588-591. IEEE, 1995.
- Philip Clarkson and Tony Robinson. Towards improved language model evaluation measures. In Sixth European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology , 1999.
- Thomas M. Cover and Joy A. Thomas. Elements of Information Theory (Wiley Series in Telecommunications and Signal Processing) . Wiley-Interscience, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ISBN 0471241954.
- Imre Csiszar and J´ anos K¨ orner. Information theory: coding theorems for discrete memoryless systems . Cambridge University Press, 2011.
- A. P. Dawid. The well-calibrated bayesian. Journal of the Am. Stat. Assoc , 77, 1982.
- A. P. Dawid. The impossibility of inductive inference. Journal of the Am. Stat. Assoc , 80, 1985.
- D. P. Foster. Prediction in the worst case. Annals of Statistics , 19, 1991.
- Chengyue Gong, Di He, Xu Tan, Tao Qin, Liwei Wang, and Tie-Yan Liu. Frage: frequency-agnostic word representation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 1341-1352, 2018.
- Edouard Grave, Armand Joulin, and Nicolas Usunier. Improving neural language models with a continuous cache. arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.04426 , 2016. · arXiv
- Chuan Guo, Geoff Pleiss, Yu Sun, and Kilian Q Weinberger. On calibration of modern neural networks. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning-Volume 70 , pages 1321-1330. JMLR. org, 2017.
- Yangfeng Ji, Trevor Cohn, Lingpeng Kong, Chris Dyer, and Jacob Eisenstein. Document context language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.03962 , 2015. · arXiv
- Uwe Jost and ES Atwell. Proposal for a mutual-information based language model. In Proceedings of the 1994 AISB Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Speech and Handwriting Recognition . AISB, 1994.
- Rafal Jozefowicz, Oriol Vinyals, Mike Schuster, Noam Shazeer, and Yonghui Wu. Exploring the limits of language modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.02410 , 2016. · arXiv
- Nan Rosemary Ke, Anirudh Goyal, Olexa Bilaniuk, Jonathan Binas, Michael C Mozer, Chris Pal, and Yoshua Bengio. Sparse attentive backtracking: Temporal credit assignment through reminding. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 7651-7662, 2018.
- Urvashi Khandelwal, He He, Peng Qi, and Dan Jurafsky. Sharp nearby, fuzzy far away: How neural language models use context. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , volume 1, pages 284-294, 2018.
- Quoc V Le, Navdeep Jaitly, and Geoffrey E Hinton. A simple way to initialize recurrent networks of rectified linear units. arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.00941 , 2015. · arXiv
- Henry Lin and Max Tegmark. Critical behavior in physics and probabilistic formal languages. Entropy , 19(7):299, 2017.
- David McAllester. Information theoretic co-training. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.07572 , 2018. · arXiv
- G´ abor Melis, Chris Dyer, and Phil Blunsom. On the state of the art of evaluation in neural language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.05589 , 2017. · arXiv
- Stephen Merity, Nitish Shirish Keskar, and Richard Socher. Regularizing and Optimizing LSTM Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.02182 , 2017. · arXiv
- Stephen Merity, Nitish Shirish Keskar, and Richard Socher. An Analysis of Neural Language Modeling at Multiple Scales. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.08240 , 2018. · arXiv
- Tomas Mikolov and Geoffrey Zweig. Context dependent recurrent neural network language model. In 2012 IEEE Spoken Language Technology Workshop (SLT) , pages 234-239. IEEE, 2012.
- Youssef Mroueh and Tom Sercu. Fisher gan. In I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 , pages 2513-2523. Curran Associates, Inc., 2017. URL http://papers.nips.cc/ paper/6845-fisher-gan.pdf .
- Alfred Mller. Integral probability metrics and their generating classes of functions. Advances in Applied Probability , 29:429-443, 06 1997. doi: 10.2307/1428011. · DOI
- Alexandru Niculescu-Mizil and Rich Caruana. Predicting good probabilities with supervised learning. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Machine learning , pages 625-632. ACM, 2005.
- Stefan Ortmanns and Hermann Ney. Look-ahead techniques for fast beam search. Computer Speech & Language , 14(1):15-32, 2000.
- John C. Platt. Probabilistic outputs for support vector machines and comparisons to regularized likelihood methods. In Advances in Large Margin Classifiers , pages 61-74. MIT Press, 1999.
- Claude E Shannon. Prediction and entropy of printed english. Bell system technical journal , 30(1): 50-64, 1951.
- Volker Steinbiss, Bach-Hiep Tran, and Hermann Ney. Improvements in beam search. In Third International Conference on Spoken Language Processing , 1994.
- Shuntaro Takahashi and Kumiko Tanaka-Ishii. Cross entropy of neural language models at infinitya new bound of the entropy rate. Entropy , 20(11):839, 2018.
- Sho Takase, Jun Suzuki, and Masaaki Nagata. Direct output connection for a high-rank language model. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 4599-4609, 2018.
- Trieu H Trinh, Andrew M Dai, Thang Luong, and Quoc V Le. Learning longer-term dependencies in rnns with auxiliary losses. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.00144 , 2018. · arXiv
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, glyph[suppress] Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 5998-6008, 2017a.
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, glyph[suppress] Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in neural information processing systems , pages 5998-6008, 2017b.
- V. Vovk. Competitive on-line statistics. International Statistical Review , 69, 2001.
- Tian Wang and Kyunghyun Cho. Larger-context language modelling with recurrent neural network. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , volume 1, pages 1319-1329, 2016.
- Wenlin Wang, Zhe Gan, Wenqi Wang, Dinghan Shen, Jiaji Huang, Wei Ping, Sanjeev Satheesh, and Lawrence Carin. Topic compositional neural language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.09783 , 2017. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Models
Zhao, T. Z., Wallace, E., Feng, S., Klein, D., & Singh, S. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.09690 · Cited by 513 · see citing works
Calibrated Language Models Must Hallucinate
Kalai, A. T., & Vempala, S. S. (2024) · Proceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing · doi:10.1145/3618260.3649777 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Cognitive Architectures for Language Agents
Sumers, T. R., Yao, S., Narasimhan, K., & Griffiths, T. L. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.02427 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
“On the other hand, LLM development might be influenced or even shaped by the increased usage of reasoning toward complex decision making, and better support decision making by solving known issues such as over-confidence and miscalibration (Jiang et al., 2021; Braverman et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2022), misalignment w…”
BackgroundSelf-citation
- Authors
- Braverman, M., Chen, X., Kakade, S. M., Narasimhan, K., Zhang, C., & Zhang, Y.
- Affiliations
- Princeton University (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2019
- Pages
- 1089-1099
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1906.05664
- OpenAlex
- W3035131109
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- International Conference on Machine Learning
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
- Keywords
- entropy rate, long-range dependencies, calibration error, LSTM, transformer models
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
