Entropy-Reservoir Bregman Projection: An Information-Geometric Unification of Model Collapse
Open accessAbstract
Self-referential learning -- training a model on data it generated itself -- promises boundless scalability but chronically suffers from model collapse: language models degenerate into repetitive text, GANs drop modes, and reinforcement-learning policies over-exploit. Although practitioners employ ad~hoc fixes such as real-data mixing, entropy bonuses, knowledge distillation, or retrieval-augmented generation, a single principle that explains both the failure mode and the success of these fixes has remained elusive. We present Entropy-Reservoir Bregman Projection (ERBP), an information-geometric framework that unifies these phenomena. We model the closed loop as a stochastic Bregman projection sequence in distribution space. Without external coupling, finite-sample noise forces the system to project onto an ever-shrinking empirical support, causing exponential entropy decay and eventual collapse. Introducing an Entropy Reservoir -- a high-entropy distribution mixed into each projection -- injects a controllable entropy flux that provably stabilises the dynamics. Our theory yields (i) a necessary condition for collapse, (ii) a sufficient condition that guarantees a non-trivial entropy floor, and (iii) closed-form rates that depend only on sample size and the strong-convexity/Lipschitz constants of the Bregman generator. Experiments on large-language-model self-training, Soft Actor-Critic in reinforcement learning, and GAN optimisation validate our predictions and show that disparate stabilisation heuristics correspond to specific reservoir choices and coupling coefficients. ERBP thus transforms a collection of folk remedies into a single, quantitative design rule: monitor and budget your entropy flux.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Model collapse in LLMs, GANs, and RL policies is one phenomenon, with real-data mixing, entropy bonuses, and retrieval all acting as instances of a single entropy-reservoir principle.
“an information-geometric account showing model collapse in LLMs, GANs, and RL policies to be one phenomenon, with real-data mixing, entropy bonuses, and retrieval all acting as instances of a single entropy-reservoir principle [145].”
From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [145]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops
Chen, M., Wang, L., & Qu, B. (2026) · arXiv
“Nobody has characterized the minimum exogenous-signal rate that sustains improvement, though the entropy-reservoir framework [145] suggests the question is well-posed.”
- Authors
- Chen, J.
- Corresponding author
- Chen, Jingwei
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2512.14879
- OpenAlex
- W7116129749
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Algorithms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Keywords
- model collapse, Bregman projection, information geometry, entropy decay, soft actor-critic
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