REVIEW 8 cited by
Mind the Gap: Assessing Temporal Generalization in Neural Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Mind the Gap: Assessing Temporal Generalization in Neural Language Models
read the original abstract
Our world is open-ended, non-stationary, and constantly evolving; thus what we talk about and how we talk about it change over time. This inherent dynamic nature of language contrasts with the current static language modelling paradigm, which trains and evaluates models on utterances from overlapping time periods. Despite impressive recent progress, we demonstrate that Transformer-XL language models perform worse in the realistic setup of predicting future utterances from beyond their training period, and that model performance becomes increasingly worse with time. We find that, while increasing model size alone -- a key driver behind recent progress -- does not solve this problem, having models that continually update their knowledge with new information can indeed mitigate this performance degradation over time. Hence, given the compilation of ever-larger language modelling datasets, combined with the growing list of language-model-based NLP applications that require up-to-date factual knowledge about the world, we argue that now is the right time to rethink the static way in which we currently train and evaluate our language models, and develop adaptive language models that can remain up-to-date with respect to our ever-changing and non-stationary world. We publicly release our dynamic, streaming language modelling benchmarks for WMT and arXiv to facilitate language model evaluation that takes temporal dynamics into account.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Mechanism Plausibility in Generative Agent-Based Modeling
Introduces the Mechanism Plausibility Scale to distinguish generative sufficiency from mechanistic plausibility in LLM-based agent-based models.
-
Evaluating Temporal Consistency in Multi-Turn Language Models
Language models frequently violate temporal scope stability in multi-turn dialogues by drifting toward present-day assumptions even when they possess the correct facts.
-
Improving language models by retrieving from trillions of tokens
RETRO matches GPT-3 and Jurassic-1 performance on the Pile benchmark using 25 times fewer parameters by conditioning on retrieved chunks from a 2-trillion-token database.
-
KARLA: Knowledge-base Augmented Retrieval for Language Models
KARLA augments LLMs by training them to generate special tokens that query a knowledge base for facts during generation, improving accuracy, traceability, and updatability.
-
A Meta Reinforcement Learning Approach to Goals-Based Wealth Management
MetaRL pre-trained on GBWM problems delivers near-optimal dynamic strategies in 0.01s achieving 97.8% of DP optimal utility and handles larger problems where DP fails.
-
LaMDA: Language Models for Dialog Applications
LaMDA shows that fine-tuning on human-value annotations and consulting external knowledge sources significantly improves safety and factual grounding in large dialog models beyond what scaling alone achieves.
-
Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Models
The authors provide a detailed taxonomy of 21 risks associated with language models, covering discrimination, information leaks, misinformation, malicious applications, interaction harms, and societal impacts like job...
-
Mechanism Plausibility in Generative Agent-Based Modeling
Introduces the Mechanism Plausibility Scale, a four-level framework separating generative sufficiency from mechanistic plausibility in LLM-based agent-based models.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.