Model Collapse

Iterative fine-tuning on synthetic data causes \emph{model collapse}: output diversity narrows as rare patterns are progressively lost, a signature most visible as phrase-level repetition. Existing mitigations either require model log-probabilities, an external oracle, or continued access to real human data. Here we develop a new approach grounded in mathematical information theory: the non-parametric Kontoyiannis entropy rate estimator $h_k$, computed entirely from raw text via match-length statistics, with no model of any kind. We show that this is in fact a \emph{superior} training-data filter on text-diversity metrics in a fully-synthetic, single-lineage fine-tuning setting. In a six-generation QLoRA collapse experiment on Llama-3.1-8B, logprob-based filtering (the most established model-access-requiring baseline) provides no significant text-diversity benefit on any metric ($p > 0.23$), whereas $h_k$-filtering yields $+42\%$ unique trigrams, $+30\%$ vocabulary, and $-19\%$ repetition (all $p < 0.001$). We validate $h_k$ as a cross-domain entropy proxy ($β= 0.924$, $R^2 = 0.746$) and collapse detector ($ρ= +0.454$, $p < 0.0001$) across 4domains, 2temperatures, 2~generator--scorer model pairs, and 1{,}520 generated documents. Our results demonstrate that information theoretic approaches to collapse mitigation are efficient, and suggest new approaches for maintaining multi-agent diversity.

Model collapse arises when generative models are trained on synthetic data produced by earlier models. The phenomenon has attracted considerable attention because of its societal and technical implications. However, previous studies have reached seemingly contradictory conclusions: replacing real data with synthetic data causes collapse (Shumailov et al.), yet accumulating real data alongside synthetic data can prevent it. For diffusion models, we study an intermediate regime typical of finite-budget pipelines: all past datasets and the real data are kept, but each new model is trained on a fixed-size sample from this growing pool, so the real fraction vanishes without any data being removed. Experiments on a 2D spiral dataset as well as the image benchmarks (MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, and CIFAR-10) show that replacement protocol degrades dataset rapidly as in the literature, whereas the fixed budget degrades only partially, sparing some features. A linear-response model of the multi-generational parameter dynamics, analyzed by stochastic recursion, confirms that the two protocols differ: some features will be fragile and lost within a few generations for both protocols, while some will be robust and preserved over practically unbounded horizons under the fixed budget protocol.

Repeated training on model-generated data can degrade later models. One possible response is to use provenance when deciding which generated examples to reuse. We test both how reliably that provenance can be recovered and whether it helps identify better training data. Using financial-risk text, we first identify the source of generated passages and then repeat the test after rewriting them. Generator attribution is 98.7% accurate on the original passages but falls to 53.1% after paraphrasing and 29.0% after style rewriting. Generated-versus-human detection remains close to perfect against the tested human comparison set. We then compare two ways of selecting generated examples over three rounds of generation and retraining. One uses source information. The other uses a score from a separate reference model. The two rules select different examples, but the planned comparison does not detect a stable difference in the degradation of the resulting models. The results show that identifying where data came from and identifying which data are useful for training are separate problems. The experiment therefore separates source identity, criterion-facing selection, and recursive training outcome: neither the provenance score nor the tested criterion-facing proxy is established as sufficient for future recursive behaviour.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are now routinely trained using synthetic data, since high-quality human data has been exhausted by the ever increasing needs of larger and larger models. However, recursive training on synthetic data frequently induces model collapse, a degenerative feedback loop where models progressively forget the true underlying data distribution. Training on a mixture of synthetic and fresh human data is a logical countermeasure and can prevent model collapse. However, it is an open question as to what is the exact minimum required ratio of human-to-synthetic data to maintain training stability. In this paper, we establish rigorous theoretical guarantees on the minimum rate of human data required to prevent model collapse. Although previous work established a formal lower bound for this ratio, such bound can be vacuous for very high dimensions, as the analysis relies on the usual Euclidean metric in R^n and is not adapted to the space of categorical probability distributions. Instead, in this paper we explicitly leverage the information-geometric structure of the probability simplex by analyzing the dynamics of the process under the Fisher-Rao metric. We derive quantitative contraction and invariance bounds that are stable and do not become trivial as the dimensions increase. Thus, we show that the effective required data ratio to prevent model collapse is different than previously implied.

How fast does a language model degrade when trained on its own outputs? Theory traces it to gradually accumulating errors, while experiments report repeated phrases within ten generations. Under a fixed sampling seed in vLLM, the fast loss of lexical diversity comes from the sampler. When vLLM serves a batch from one seeded sampling configuration, every request receives the same random draws, and a fixed seed replays them every generation. Fine-tuning raises the tokens that won, and the replayed draws let them win by more. Sharing across requests and replay across generations matter only together. Remove either one, by changing the shared seed every generation or by giving each request its own seed that repeats every generation, and the unique-4-gram fraction of two StableLM checkpoints stays near its starting value of about 0.98 through generation 3. Keep both, and the replayed shared seed takes seven checkpoints from five families to between 0.045 and 0.38 by then. Three generations of replay write the favoured phrases into the weights: decoded with one seed per request, the generation-3 weights of the replayed StableLM-2-1.6B chain recover most of their diversity, yet the phrase that filled every sample under the shared seed still opens 46% of them. Without replay, five checkpoints drift slowly, consistent with the gradual accumulation that theory describes, and three turn incoherent though their diversity scores stay high. One peer-reviewed model-collapse pipeline that fine-tunes Gemma-2-27B samples identical prompts under one seeded configuration, and three quarters of the rows it released for one iteration repeat nearly as often as one such batch copies them. A seed per request restores the fresh sample that stability analyses assume.

Synthetic data has become a promising way to scale model training beyond limited human-generated data but it may also induce strong model collapse (Dohmatob et al., 2024), where any fixed fraction of synthetic data prevents model performance from improving under data scaling, leaving a non-vanishing excess risk floor. In this paper, we study how synthetic data affects the generalization of one-pass SGD in high-dimensional linear regression with model shift. We establish finite-sample risk bounds for mixed and two-stage training, separating standard bias and variance from source-mismatch effects, namely fluctuation and persistent drift under mixing and filtered initialization bias under two-stage. These bounds reveal a sharp contrast: mixed training induces strong model collapse, while two-stage training avoids the floor by using synthetic data only in the first stage, showing that collapse is not inevitable under a simple data curriculum. Under a random sketch model, we further obtain scaling laws for both protocols, with tight results for mixed training in the optimization-saturated regime. These laws show that larger models may amplify synthetic-induced degradation under mixing, and quantify how high-quality synthetic pretraining may reduce bias in two-stage training. Finally, we establish an exact finite-sample necessary-and-sufficient condition for two-stage training to strictly outperform real-only training under the same real-data budget and identical real-stage updates. Overall, our results highlight that synthetic data is neither inherently harmful nor beneficial; its effect depends critically on both its quality and the training protocol used to incorporate it.

Model collapse is a central challenge in learning from synthetic data: as later-generation large language models (LLMs) are trained on an increasing proportion of model-generated data, performance can degrade due to narrowed coverage and accumulated bias. Existing work mainly studies how to bound this degradation. In iterative model evolution, however, the more meaningful objective is to ensure that each successive model improves over its predecessor, which requires diagnosing collapse at a granularity that is actionable for data curation. We study this problem in synthetic data self-improving for instruction tuning. We show that collapse in this setting is not simply uniform performance degradation, but can appear as a polarization of competence, where synthetic training reinforces already strong skills while further degrading weak ones. Motivated by this observation, we propose KITE (Knowledge-boundary Instruction Tuning via Exploration), a two-stage framework that combines failure-guided data generation with boundary-aware uncertainty curation. Experiments across several datasets and multiple open-source LLMs show that KITE yields more stable improvement than strong synthetic-data baselines.

Water looks unchanged as it warms, then at a critical point it boils. We ask whether long-horizon language agents show an analogous transition in their implicit world models. In some parameter settings, changing state load by a small amount, or adding a single step of horizon, leaves behavior nearly unchanged; near a critical boundary, the same small change causes a sudden world collapse. We study this effect in a deterministic task family with exact per-step gold state. A large grid search over state cardinality, dependency density, horizon, branching, observation mode, and mutation rate reveals a phase diagram: a solved plateau, a narrow transition band, and a collapse floor. Per-step traces show the mechanism: world-state fidelity fails before action validity, so the agent is not merely choosing a bad action; it is acting from a corrupted world. Stronger models translate the critical boundary but do not remove the qualitative transition. These results make world-model collapse a measurable bottleneck for long-horizon agents.

Recursive self-training can degrade neural generative models when generated data is reused without fresh human data or external quality control. We study this risk in code LLMs, where AI-generated code can enter real repositories, later become training data, and create a repository-scale self-training loop. While software development traditionally interrupts this loop through pull-request review, tests, compilation, and human approval, AI coding tools now produce code faster than humans can review it, and code review itself is increasingly automated by AI systems. We therefore compare three recursive fine-tuning regimes: no review, Human-gate review using model-independent filters such as compilation and static quality checks, and AI-self-gate review using the code LLM's own signals such as perplexity and binary self-scoring. Across multiple code LLMs and benchmarks, no review collapses fastest, Human-gate filters slow but do not stop collapse, and AI-self-gate filters can look strong early but later lose their filtering effect. In the clearest case, the binary self-gate enters a rubber-stamp regime where acceptance scores rise while benchmark correctness falls. We explain this behavior by formulating review as gated distributional reweighting, proving that AI self-gating degenerates to ungated self-training under a self-confirming acceptance condition, and giving a spectral analysis of representation-level covariance concentration under recursive retraining. These results suggest that stable recursive code LLM training requires exogenous verification rather than model-coupled self-review.

Since 2023, computer scientists have warned against model collapse -- the contamination of training sets with AI-generated outputs that progressively degrade model performance. Exemplifying a positive-feedback-driven failure, it produces effects such as word repetition or pixel noise, ultimately leading to a loss of meaning and coherence -- at least from an engineering standpoint. From a creative one, however, collapse is not merely a breakdown: it also functions as a recursive mirror that recalls early analog video feedback experiments, raising once again the question of what happens when a system turns inward and sees itself. In such cases, so-called machine vision no longer transmits the world (as in tele-vision) but increasingly generates worlds from within. Drawing on media archaeology through case studies of both historical video synthesis techniques and contemporary artistic uses of machine learning, this paper examines what recursive training reveals about the dependent nature of AI-generated data. It argues that the potential effects of collapse challenge transhumanist ideals while inviting an aesthetic perspective, positioning noise and recursion as key concepts for understanding both artmaking and the AI ecosystem. Distributing agency across scales and networks, the latter currently remains reliant on new human-produced content, particularly within foundation models trained on massive datasets.

Recursive training of generative models on their own outputs can lead to model collapse, a compounding drift away from the true data distribution. Existing theoretical works bound finite-round error accumulation in the context of diffusion models, but two questions remain open:~what distribution does the recursion converge to, and how fast? We answer both, isolating a mechanism distinct from imperfect learning: even with perfect score estimation and exact sampling, the early stopping of the reverse diffusion (required for numerical stability) drives a progressive drift away from the data distribution. We prove that this recursion converges geometrically to a unique limiting distribution, which admits a closed-form characterization as an infinite mixture of increasingly Gaussian-smoothed versions of the data distribution. A Hermite spectral decomposition of this limit reveals that recursive training acts as a low-pass filter: higher-order modes, which encode fine non-Gaussian structure, are attenuated much more strongly than coarse modes. This spectral picture motivates annealed truncation schedules that progressively shrink truncation times across retraining rounds; we prove that any schedule converging to $0$ asymptotically eliminates recursive compounding. Finally, we show our idealized characterization is robust: in the presence of discretization and score estimation errors, the learned distribution remains in a Wasserstein-2 ball around the ideal limit, with mode-dependent contraction rates that contract high-order errors faster than low-order ones. We validate the theory on synthetic Gaussian mixtures and CIFAR-10.

The proliferation of recursive training on synthetic data can alleviate data scarcity but risks model collapse, where repeated training erodes distributional tails and homogenizes outputs. Data selection is widely viewed as a remedy, yet its reliability depends critically on the reference distribution used by the verifier. We show that in low-resource verification regimes, where each verifier observes only a small, fragmented, and biased slice of the target manifold, selection itself becomes biased. This situation naturally arises in low-resource data silos such as healthcare consortia or proprietary financial institutions, where raw data cannot be pooled and local references are inherently incomplete. As a result, selection preferentially retains samples aligned with the local manifold while pruning globally relevant tail modes, turning from a safeguard against collapse into a mechanism that precipitates it. We theoretically prove that such siloed selection accelerates collapse and induces power-law diversity decay. As an initial mitigation, we construct Wasserstein proxy references from multiple silos without sharing raw data. Empirical results confirm that local-reference selection fails on skewed distributions, whereas collaborative proxy references mitigate diversity degradation, suggesting that recursive synthetic-data pipelines require particular caution when real-data coverage is fragmented or scarce.

Entropy minimization (EM) is the dominant objective for test-time adaptation, yet its failure mode, model collapse, remains poorly understood. In this work, we show that distribution shifts can cause feature clusters corresponding to distinct classes in the model's representation space to merge, while the decision boundary remains fixed. This induces a systematic skew in the predicted class distribution, referred to as prediction bias. Prediction bias refers to a shift in the predicted class distribution, with some classes overrepresented and others suppressed. We show that entropy minimization amplifies this prediction bias by tightening the existing clusters, reinforcing the incorrect groupings until all predictions collapse to a trivial solution. Next, to demonstrate the significance of prediction bias and mitigate it, we further propose Distribution Shift Bias Reduction (DSBR), a bias-correcting objective that specifically targets this failure mode by equalizing the contribution of each predicted class to the unsupervised entropy minimization loss. To study this failure mode, we design suitable adaptation settings using four medical-imaging datasets and additionally evaluate on ImageNet-C. We find that DSBR consistently stabilizes test-time adaptation, prevents model collapse, and matches or outperforms state-of-the-art methods. Moreover, DSBR operates solely at test-time.

Recursive systems can enter collapse-like regimes -- self-reinforcing amplification, persistent recursion, and narrowing diversity that mask accelerating internal degradation -- before overt failure becomes visible. We introduce Loopzero, a claim-bounded benchmark framework for testing whether recursive failures follow a directional telemetry pattern: rising gain (G), recursive persistence (p), and declining diversity ($δ$). The claim boundary is specified in Lean; the Lean artifact does not verify real telemetry, benchmark validity, or detector performance. We evaluate the bridge on two frozen public-artifact benchmarks: a segmented public-markets benchmark (Volmageddon 2018, COVID MWCB 2020) and a MovieLens-25M offline deterministic recommender replay. Detectors are evaluated under a locked equal-false-positive contract (FP $\in$ [0.03, 0.07], pre-registered) so all configurations face the same alert budget. Neither tested standard comparators nor Loopzero's pre-registered quantile detector achieved an accepted operating point. Directional witness alignment held on both canonical benchmarks, with adjacent-horizon and row-level limitations disclosed. Digitized Shumailov et al. (2024) LLM training-loop trajectories are directionally consistent with the pattern; matched-FP evaluation in that domain is deferred. The contribution is a reproducible, falsifiable benchmark framework for evaluating recursive-collapse warning claims under an explicit alert-budget contract -- non-acceptance reported as a first-class scientific outcome.

We use a mean-field-based transformer model to theoretically investigate how auxiliary variables, such as positional encoding, prevent mode collapse of self-attention mechanisms. The use of mean-field transformers to analyze the properties of self-attention mechanisms has garnered significant attention in recent years due to their ability to comprehensively analyze token interactions. However, analysis of this simple model suggests that mode collapse, where token distributions degenerate to a single point, occurs during long inferences (i.e., many layers), indicating a discrepancy with reality. This study investigates this mean-field transformer model and demonstrates that the introduction of auxiliary variables, such as positional encoding, acts as a counterforce against theoretical mode collapse. Specifically, we show that in the theoretical scheme, the energy-maximizing distribution does not degenerate to a single point; instead, it is characterized by a pushforward of the auxiliary variable distribution, thereby avoiding concentration in the Dirac measure. Our main examples are the positional encoding and the fixed prompt insertion treated as a parallel auxiliary-variable mechanism. Furthermore, we demonstrate that positional encoding and prompt insertion possess universality of representation in the limit, meaning that the limit distribution of inference can exactly represent a wide class of distributions. We also analyze several key properties of positional encoding and metastability, and validate our theoretical results through mathematical experiments.

Foundation models are increasingly trained on synthetic data generated by prior model iterations rather than exclusively on real data. This self-consuming training paradigm can lead to model collapse, divergence, or bias amplification. Recent work (Ferbach et al., 2024) shows that incorporating human curation into the loop can steer a self-consuming model toward human-aligned behavior, but these analyses focus on a single, isolated model that solely consumes its own outputs. In practice, however, models often interact and train on input-output pairs produced by other models. This paper studies self-consuming training in the multi-model regime. We first formalize a framework for interacting self-consuming models and characterize when the resulting dynamical system converges to a stable point. We then examine how human curation of one model affects its own alignment (self-influence) and how such effects propagate to other models (cross-influence). Unlike isolated settings where human curation always enhances model alignment, we show that cross-model interactions can dampen or even invert this effect, ultimately degrading long-term alignment.

Model collapse, the progressive degradation of LLMs trained on their own outputs, has been characterized statistically but lacks a linguistic explanation for which structures degrade, in what order, and why. We show that iterated learning theory from cultural evolution fills this gap. We derive five falsifiable predictions, distinguish those uniquely discriminative for the theory from confirmatory ones, and test them by self-training LLaMA-2-7B and Mistral-7B over 10 generations in English, German, and Turkish. The critical discriminative finding: compositionality follows a non-monotonic trajectory (initially rising, then falling) under unfiltered self-training. This signature persists with maximally regular seed data (ruling out noise removal) and is sustained only by task-grounded filtering, not random filtering, providing the first LLM-scale evidence for the compression-communication tradeoff. All predictions are confirmed with large effect sizes (Hedges' $g > 1.6$; $\mathrm{BF}_{10} > 100$), and LLM regularization gradients closely match human behavioral data ($R^2 = 0.94$). These results reframe model collapse as a cultural transmission phenomenon and yield concrete principles for self-training pipeline design.

Successive self-training on a language model's own outputs is widely characterized as a process of flattening: diversity drops, distributions narrow, and the text becomes "more like itself." We provide evidence that this characterization is incomplete. Across eleven generations of self-training on five models (GPT-2 124M, Pythia-410M, Pythia-1.4B, OPT-1.3B, Pythia-2.8B), language is not flattened uniformly -- it is restructured. Surface markers (discourse connectives, hedges, em-dashes) rise, while mid- and deep-syntactic structures (questions, parentheticals, passives, subjunctives) collapse. We formalize this asymmetric collapse as the Structural Depth Hypothesis (SDH): the per-generation decay rate of a linguistic feature is predicted primarily by its structural depth -- the number of nested syntactic dependencies it requires -- and only secondarily by its generation-zero output frequency. Pooling 17-feature panels from five models spanning three architecture families (N=85), the pooled Spearman correlation is rho=0.540 (p < 10^{-6}; cluster-bootstrap 95% CI [0.434, 0.634]), while frequency is a substantially weaker predictor (rho=0.225). A matched human-text fine-tuning control yields rho=0.039 (p=0.88), confirming the gradient is self-training-specific. We further document a Superficial Complexity Paradox: aggregate complexity proxies (dep-tree depth, TTR, word length) all rise as the underlying clause structure dies, with direct implications for training-data curation and LLM-text detection.

The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence has given rise to an interactive learning environment, where model parameters are continuously updated using not only data generated by natural processes, but also synthetic outputs produced by other models. This paradigm introduces two major challenges: (1) training data are no longer drawn exclusively from the target population, undermining a core assumption of classical statistical learning, and (2) model training processes become inherently correlated, as models interact with one another through repeated exposure to each other's synthetic outputs in a potentially complex manner. Establishing reliable statistical inference in such structured interactive learning environments therefore remains an important open problem. In particular, there is growing concern about model collapse, a phenomenon in which the performance of generative models progressively degrades as they are trained on synthetic data produced by earlier model generations. Prior work on model collapse primarily focuses on a single model trained on its own output, failing to capture model performance in multi-model interactive settings. In this work, we fill this gap by investigating the performance of generative models in an interactive learning environment with general interaction patterns. In particular, we formalize model interactions using directed graphs and show that the occurrence of model collapse depends critically on the topology of the interaction graph. We further derive an explicit necessary and sufficient condition characterizing when model collapse occurs, and establish finite-sample results for linear regression and asymptotic guarantees for general M-estimators. We support our theoretical findings through extensive numerical experiments.

Generative artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming the supply side of training data: an increasing share of new tokens, images, and structured records is produced by previous-generation models rather than by human originators. Recursive training on such synthetic content induces a measurable and often irreversible loss of distributional fidelity, a phenomenon known as model collapse. We develop the first unified microeconomic theory of synthetic data markets under model collapse. We introduce the Synthetic Data Contamination Equilibrium (SDCE), prove existence and generic uniqueness, derive a welfare decomposition W = W_prod + W_cons - L_coll - L_info, establish a Wasserstein-gradient-flow mean-field collapse limit, prove an impossibility of information-constrained implementation, and obtain closed-form expressions for the welfare-maximizing provenance subsidy s* = KL(q||p)/(2 kappa) and the welfare-maximizing watermark strength w* = (1 - psi) KL(q||p)/(2 kappa psi). We prove an information-theoretic Cramer-Rao lower bound on any provenance estimator using only producer-side observations and show that the Provenance-Market Iterative Retraining (PMIR) algorithm attains this bound up to constants while converging to an epsilon-SDCE in O(epsilon^-2 log T) iterations. A reduced-form OLS estimation on a C4-synthetic benchmark over ten retraining generations yields a collapse-rate coefficient b-hat = 0.181 (HAC s.e. 0.024), within one standard error of the structural prediction 0.183. Calibrated experiments raise generation-ten model quality by 23.1 percent over the unregulated benchmark while lowering the 2-Wasserstein drift on a held-out diversity probe from 0.318 to 0.142. Scaling experiments over generations t in {1,...,10} recover a logarithmic-in-t collapse law log Q_t = log Q_0 - 0.183 t rho^2 with R^2 = 0.962.

Recursive learning -- where models are trained on data generated by previous versions of themselves -- is increasingly common in large language models, autonomous agents, and self-supervised systems. However, standard performance metrics (loss, perplexity, accuracy) often fail to detect internal degradation before it becomes irreversible. Here we identify a phenomenon we call silent collapse: under broad recursive conditions, model internal distributions -- predictive entropy, representational diversity, and tail coverage -- progressively contract even as conventional metrics appear stable or improving. We discover that silent collapse is not abrupt. Its onset is reliably preceded by three trajectory-level precursors: (1) contraction of anchor entropy, (2) freezing of representation drift, and (3) erosion of tail coverage. These signals manifest multiple generations before any degradation in standard validation metrics, enabling early warning. Based on these precursors, we propose the MTR (Monitor--Trust--Regulator) framework, a lightweight metacognitive loop that monitors trajectory statistics, estimates a slow-timescale trust variable, and adaptively modulates the effective learning intensity. MTR provides early warning and actively prevents silent collapse without requiring access to pristine real data -- a critical advantage when original data is unavailable, contaminated, or private.

Recursive retraining of generative models poses a critical representation challenge: when synthetic outputs are curated based on a fixed reward signal, the model tends to collapse onto a narrow set of outputs that over-optimize that objective. Prior work suggests that such collapse is unavoidable without adding real data into the mix. We revisit this conclusion from an alignment perspective and show that collapse can be mitigated through curation based on multiple reward functions. We formalize the dynamics of recursive training under heterogeneous preferences and prove that, under certain conditions, the model converges to a stable distribution that allocates probability mass across competing high-reward regions. The limiting distribution preserves diversity and provably satisfies a weighted Nash bargaining solution, offering a formal interpretation of value aggregation in synthetic retraining loops.

Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping how knowledge is produced, with increasing reliance on AI systems for generation, summarization, and reasoning. While prior work has studied cognitive offloading in humans and model collapse in recursive training, these effects are typically considered in isolation. We propose a unified perspective: humans and language models form a coupled dynamical system linked by a feedback loop of usage, generation, and retraining. We introduce a minimal model with three variables -- human cognition, data quality, and model capability -- and show that this feedback can give rise to distinct dynamical regimes. Our analysis identifies three regimes: co-evolutionary enhancement, fragile equilibrium, and degenerative convergence. Through a simple simulation, we demonstrate that increasing reliance on AI can induce a transition toward a low-diversity, suboptimal equilibrium. From an information-theoretic perspective, this transition corresponds to an emergent information bottleneck in the human-AI loop, where entropy reduction reflects loss of diversity and support under closed-loop feedback rather than beneficial compression. These results suggest that the trajectory of AI systems is shaped not only by model design, but by the dynamics of human-AI co-evolution.

Standard fine-tuning of transformer models on causal reasoning tasks leads to catastrophic model collapse, where models learn trivial solutions such as always predicting "Yes" or "No" regardless of input structure. We demonstrate that fine-tuning Gemma 270M on transitivity and d-separation tasks without semantic loss results in 100% collapse rate, with models achieving misleadingly high accuracy (73.9%) while learning no causal reasoning. We propose a semantic loss function with graph-based logical constraints and dynamic lambda scheduling that prevents this collapse. Our approach achieves 70.4% accuracy on transitivity tasks and 68.6% on d-separation tasks with stable, context-dependent predictions, representing a 42.7% improvement over collapsed baselines. Adversarial evaluation on 1,000 structural reasoning samples shows semantic models achieve 67-70% accuracy while collapsed models fail catastrophically at 43-71%. We validate our findings through comprehensive benchmarking on 200,000+ evaluation samples across five model variants, demonstrating that semantic loss is essential and not optional, for stable causal reasoning in transformers.

Model collapse, the degradation in performance that arises when generative models are trained on the outputs of prior models, is an increasing concern as artificially generated content proliferates. Related critiques of large language models have highlighted their tendency to reproduce frequent patterns in training data, their reliance on vast datasets, and their substantial environmental cost. Together, these factors contribute to data degradation, the reinforcement of cultural biases, and inefficient resource use. In this position paper we aim to combine these views and argue that model collapse threatens current efforts to democratize AI. By reducing training efficiency and skewing data distributions away from the tails of their support, model collapse disproportionately impacts low-resource and marginalized communities. We examine both the environmental and cultural implications of this phenomenon, situate our position within recent position papers on model collapse, and conclude with a call to action. Finally, we outline initial directions for mitigating these effects.

As scaling laws push the training of frontier large language models (LLMs) toward ever-growing data requirements, training pipelines are approaching a regime where much of the publicly available online text may be consumed. At the same time, widespread LLM usage increases the volume of machine-generated content on the web; together, these trends raise the likelihood of generated text re-entering future training corpora, increasing the associated risk of performance degradation often called model collapse. In practice, model developers address this concern through data cleaning, watermarking, synthetic-data policies, or, in some cases, blissful ignorance. However, the problem of model collapse in generative models has not been examined from a learning-theoretic perspective: we study it through the theoretical lens of the language generation in the limit framework, introducing a replay adversary that augments the example stream with the generator's own past outputs. Our main contribution is a fine-grained learning-theoretic characterization of when replay fundamentally limits generation: while replay is benign for the strongest notion of uniform generation, it provably creates separations for the weaker notions of non-uniform generation and generation in the limit. Interestingly, our positive results mirror heuristics widely used in practice, such as data cleaning, watermarking, and output filtering, while our separations show when these ideas can fail.

As artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content proliferates, models are increasingly trained on their own outputs, risking progressive degradation or collapse. In this article, we provide the first positive, rigorous theoretical results, to the best of our knowledge, showing that under model-agnostic mild conditions, the model converges to the true data-generating distribution. The convergence rate is the minimum of the model's intrinsic rate and the fraction of real data at each training iteration, revealing a phase transition between data-limited and model-limited regimes. We further show that, for biased real data, correcting the bias prevents the persistence and amplification of early bias over training iteration. Extensive experiments across simulations, real images and texts validate our theoretical framework, establishing quantitative conditions for long-term AI stability in contaminated environments.

Synthetic data has been increasingly used to train frontier generative models. However, recent studies raise key concerns that iteratively retraining a generative model on its self-generated synthetic data may keep deteriorating model performance, a phenomenon often coined model collapse. In this paper, we investigate ways to modify the synthetic retraining process to avoid model collapse, and even possibly help reverse the trend from collapse to improvement. Our key finding is that by injecting information through an external synthetic data verifier, whether a human or a better model, synthetic retraining will not cause model collapse. Specifically, we situate our theoretical analysis in the fundamental linear regression setting, showing that verifier-guided retraining can yield near-term improvements, but ultimately drives the parameter estimate to the verifier's "knowledge center" in the long run. Our theory further predicts that, unless the verifier is perfectly reliable, these early gains will plateau and may even reverse. Indeed, our experiments across linear regression, Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) trained on MNIST, and fining-tuning SmolLM2-135M on the XSUM task confirm these theoretical insights.

Post-training alignment often reduces LLM diversity, leading to a phenomenon known as mode collapse. Unlike prior work that attributes this effect to algorithmic limitations, we identify a fundamental, pervasive data-level driver: typicality bias in preference data, whereby annotators systematically favor familiar text as a result of well-established findings in cognitive psychology. We formalize this bias theoretically, verify it on preference datasets empirically, and show that it plays a central role in mode collapse. Motivated by this analysis, we introduce Verbalized Sampling, a simple, training-free prompting strategy to circumvent mode collapse. VS prompts the model to verbalize a probability distribution over a set of responses (e.g., "Generate 5 jokes about coffee and their corresponding probabilities"). Comprehensive experiments show that VS significantly improves performance across creative writing (poems, stories, jokes), dialogue simulation, open-ended QA, and synthetic data generation, without sacrificing factual accuracy and safety. For instance, in creative writing, VS increases diversity by 1.6-2.1x over direct prompting. We further observe an emergent trend that more capable models benefit more from VS. In sum, our work provides a new data-centric perspective on mode collapse and a practical inference-time remedy that helps unlock pre-trained generative diversity.

Recent studies identified an intriguing phenomenon in recursive generative model training known as model collapse, where models trained on data generated by previous models exhibit severe performance degradation. Addressing this issue and developing more effective training strategies have become central challenges in generative model research. In this paper, we investigate this phenomenon within a novel framework, where generative models are iteratively trained on a combination of newly collected real data and synthetic data from the previous training step. To develop an optimal training strategy for integrating real and synthetic data, we evaluate the performance of a weighted training scheme in various scenarios, including Gaussian distribution estimation, generalized linear models, and nonparametric estimation. We theoretically characterize the impact of the mixing proportion and weighting scheme of synthetic data on the final model's performance. Our key finding is that, across different settings, the optimal weighting scheme under different proportions of synthetic data asymptotically follows a unified expression, revealing a fundamental trade-off between leveraging synthetic data and model performance. In some cases, the optimal weight assigned to real data corresponds to the reciprocal of the golden ratio. Finally, we validate our theoretical results on extensive simulated datasets and a real tabular dataset.