Limitations of Autoregressive Models and Their Alternatives

October 22, 2020 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Chu-Cheng Lin, Aaron Jaech, Xin Li, Matthew R. Gormley, Jason Eisner arXiv ID 2010.11939 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.CL, stat.ML Citations 74 Venue North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
Standard autoregressive language models perform only polynomial-time computation to compute the probability of the next symbol. While this is attractive, it means they cannot model distributions whose next-symbol probability is hard to compute. Indeed, they cannot even model them well enough to solve associated easy decision problems for which an engineer might want to consult a language model. These limitations apply no matter how much computation and data are used to train the model, unless the model is given access to oracle parameters that grow superpolynomially in sequence length. Thus, simply training larger autoregressive language models is not a panacea for NLP. Alternatives include energy-based models (which give up efficient sampling) and latent-variable autoregressive models (which give up efficient scoring of a given string). Both are powerful enough to escape the above limitations.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted