REVIEW 1 cited by
On the Query Complexity of Verifier-Assisted Language Generation
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
read the original abstract
Recently, a plethora of works have proposed inference-time algorithms (e.g. best-of-n), which incorporate verifiers to assist the generation process. Their quality-efficiency trade-offs have been empirically benchmarked on a variety of constrained generation tasks, but the algorithmic design landscape is still largely poorly understood. In this paper, we develop a mathematical framework for reasoning about constrained generation using a pre-trained language model generator oracle and a process verifier--which can decide whether a prefix can be extended to a string which satisfies the constraints of choice. We show that even in very simple settings, access to a verifier can render an intractable problem (information-theoretically or computationally) to a tractable one. In fact, we show even simple algorithms, like tokenwise rejection sampling, can enjoy significant benefits from access to a verifier. Empirically, we show that a natural modification of tokenwise rejection sampling, in which the sampler is allowed to "backtrack" (i.e., erase the final few generated tokens) has robust and substantive benefits over natural baselines (e.g. (blockwise) rejection sampling, nucleus sampling)--both in terms of computational efficiency, accuracy and diversity.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Sample Complexity and Representation Ability of Test-time Scaling Paradigms
Best-of-n sampling provably needs about 1/Δ samples versus 1/Δ² for self-consistency, and a constructed Transformer can route among experts using verifier feedback to reach near-optimal final responses.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.