The Steering Budget: Examples beat Knobs

The deep learning revolution, kicked off by AlexNet, taught us that end-to-end training beats decomposing a problem into hand-designed stages. Generative modeling, however, has remained the exception-despite generative models being remarkably capable, they are still not trained end-to-end. This is because, at its core, generative modeling is about handling distributions with many modes, and existing scalable approaches handle this the same way, by factoring the generation procedure, which prevents end-to-end generation. In this work, we introduce Explorative Modeling, a new paradigm that instead factors the training loop, exploring K candidate matches between model generations and data, and training on the best, so predictions commit to modes rather than blurring them. We find Explorative Models (XMs) useful in two settings. First, increasing exploration adds a third pretraining axis beyond parameters and data for existing generative models-where scaling exploration monotonically improves performance across both continuous and discrete domains (images, video, and language). Notably, gains from exploration increase with scale, climbing from 7% to 36% as data scales and from 13% to 23% as models grow, with efficiency gains more than doubling at 3x the compute. Concretely, exploration improves FLOP efficiency by 4.1x, sample efficiency by 6.2x, parameter efficiency by 47%, lifts the strongest of image-generation recipes to a near-state-of-the-art 1.43 FID on ImageNet without guidance, enables scaling how end-to-end existing models are, and unlocks scaling generalization. Second, XMs enable end-to-end reconstructive generative modeling, matching diffusion on control tasks with 16-256x fewer inference steps. Together, these results establish XMs as both a new pretraining axis for existing generative models and a standalone end-to-end generative modeling paradigm.

Standard evaluation of large language models assumes stable model rankings across inference conditions. We challenge this assumption by varying the token generation budget, i.e., the maximum tokens a model may produce, across seven levels (64--4,096), evaluating four models on three reasoning benchmarks (56,476 inferences). We report four findings: (i) 3--19% of items exhibit non-monotone behavior (accuracy decreasing with more budget), even after controlling for truncation, and this phenomenon is model-specific (cross-model overlap: 6--14%). (ii) Model rankings reverse across budgets on all benchmarks ($p {<} 0.01$, McNemar). (iii) Oracle analysis reveals model complementarity up to $+27.8$pp, most pronounced at constrained budgets. (iv) A budget-aware router captures 14.1% of the oracle gap cross-domain; budget features help within-domain ($+1.6$ to $+5.7$pp) but are domain-specific and hurt transfer ($-1.2$pp). These results argue for budget-conditioned evaluation protocols.

In generative training, a model produces an output and is penalised for its difference from an example. With one output per comparison, a model that produces one common answer can outperform a model retaining a broader repertoire. Explorative Modeling (XM) produces $K$ outputs per comparison and updates on the closest, claiming exploration as a "third pretraining axis" associated with generative expressivity. Here I show the third axis is actually freedom, meaning the weakness of the constraint implied by a model's behaviour. Previous work showed freedom is a property of function rather than form. Parameters, architecture, minimum-description-length (MDL), and data can vary while the behavioural constraint remains unchanged. It was formally proved that weakest models are likeliest to generalise, and freedom selection beat MDL by 110-500% in induction experiments. I prove average XM loss depends on the chance a candidate misses an acceptable region, with exploration raising miss probability to power $K$. For $K>1$, match probability rises with freedom. I then demonstrate empirically that XM optimises for freedom. In a Forward XM experiment, larger $K$ increased or saturated measured freedom, and increased freedom at every tested value under context-dependent targets. I trained XM candidate pools and compared validation selection with a freedom selector that read unlabelled parent contexts. Freedom won in 29 of 30 cases. Generative expressivity is a mode-count proxy for freedom, that discards the extension structure that gives freedom its generalisation significance. XM is a means, freedom an end, and selecting for freedom improved XM under distribution shift.