Papers › Consistency of a Recurrent Language Model With Respect to Incomplete Decoding

Consistency of a Recurrent Language Model With Respect to Incomplete Decoding

6 Feb 2020EMNLP 2020 11arXiv:2002.02492archive 2025-07-28

Sean Welleck, Ilia Kulikov, Jaedeok Kim, Richard Yuanzhe Pang, Kyunghyun Cho

Despite strong performance on a variety of tasks, neural sequence models trained with maximum likelihood have been shown to exhibit issues such as length bias and degenerate repetition. We study the related issue of receiving infinite-length sequences from a recurrent language model when using common decoding algorithms. To analyze this issue, we first define inconsistency of a decoding algorithm, meaning that the algorithm can yield an infinite-length sequence that has zero probability under the model. We prove that commonly used incomplete decoding algorithms - greedy search, beam search, top-k sampling, and nucleus sampling - are inconsistent, despite the fact that recurrent language models are trained to produce sequences of finite length. Based on these insights, we propose two remedies which address inconsistency: consistent variants of top-k and nucleus sampling, and a self-terminating recurrent language model. Empirical results show that inconsistency occurs in practice, and that the proposed methods prevent inconsistency.

PaperPDFConference PDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

uralik/consistency-lm officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Language ModelingLanguage Modelling

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections