PreprintCited by 1Stochastic Gradient Optimization TechniquesMachine Learning and AlgorithmsReinforcement Learning in Robotics

Entropy-Reservoir Bregman Projection: An Information-Geometric Unification of Model Collapse

Open access
Chen, Jingwei·2025·arXiv

Abstract

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2512.14879

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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

Authors
Chen, J.
Corresponding author
Chen, Jingwei
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7116129749
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
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