arXiv Machine Learning By Nicolas Zucchet, Hyun Dong Lee, Scott Linderman

Language models suffer from a curse of ambiguity

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

arXiv:2608. 15448v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models increasingly rely on sampling as a driver of their own improvement, making the fidelity of their learned distributions more critical than ever.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 2

Prototype Language Models

arXiv:2607. 00510v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Knowing which training examples drive outputs is fundamental to auditing, correcting, and understanding language models, yet for modern LLMs this remains expensive, approximate, and largely post-hoc.

By Dan Ley, Giang Nguyen, Himabindu Lakkaraju, Julius Adebayo
arXiv AI
Sep 10

Limits of Reliability and Scaling in Language Models

The paper argues that large language models cannot achieve perfect reliability for any task, even with unlimited scale. It establishes that each generative task has an inherent reliability ceiling set by how much output uncertainty can be resolved from observable context, with a resolvable part that can be improved by more context and a subjective part tied to task ambiguity. The authors derive a scaling law showing that performance is limited by the scarcer resource—either training data or model capacity—and explain how this law explains phenomena such as retrieval augmentation and catastrophic forgetting.

By Subhabrata Majumdar