Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Rate of Model Collapse in Recursive Training

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

arxiv 2412.17646 v1 pith:PKAC2ZU6 submitted 2024-12-23 cs.LG cs.ITmath.ITstat.ML

Rate of Model Collapse in Recursive Training

classification cs.LG cs.ITmath.ITstat.ML
keywords modelcollapsemodelsdatadistributionsraterecursivetraining
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Given the ease of creating synthetic data from machine learning models, new models can be potentially trained on synthetic data generated by previous models. This recursive training process raises concerns about the long-term impact on model quality. As models are recursively trained on generated data from previous rounds, their ability to capture the nuances of the original human-generated data may degrade. This is often referred to as \emph{model collapse}. In this work, we ask how fast model collapse occurs for some well-studied distribution families under maximum likelihood (ML or near ML) estimation during recursive training. Surprisingly, even for fundamental distributions such as discrete and Gaussian distributions, the exact rate of model collapse is unknown. In this work, we theoretically characterize the rate of collapse in these fundamental settings and complement it with experimental evaluations. Our results show that for discrete distributions, the time to forget a word is approximately linearly dependent on the number of times it occurred in the original corpus, and for Gaussian models, the standard deviation reduces to zero roughly at $n$ iterations, where $n$ is the number of samples at each iteration. Both of these findings imply that model forgetting, at least in these simple distributions under near ML estimation with many samples, takes a long time.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Can Generative Artificial Intelligence Survive Data Contamination? Theoretical Guarantees under Contaminated Recursive Training

    cs.LG 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0

    Contaminated recursive training converges to the true distribution at rate t^{-min(p, α)} — the slower of the model's baseline rate p and the real-data fraction α.

  2. When AI Reviews Its Own Code: Recursive Self-Training Collapse in Code LLMs

    cs.SE 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Experiments across code LLMs show no-review collapses fastest, human-gated filters slow collapse, and AI self-gates lose effect over time, degenerating to ungated self-training under self-confirming acceptance as prov...