17.0CLMay 26
The Need for an External Observer Formalizing the Sufficiency Gap: A Mathematical Extension of Mixture Identifiability and Contextual Grounding in Sequence ModelsFrancesco Corielli
We construct a binary mixed-regime process with one deterministic textual regime and one random regime governed by an unobserved latent state. Even an ideal infinite-capacity sequence predictor that exactly recovers the text-only marginal law can become overconfident when the observed prefix is compatible with the wrong latent regime. The resulting entropy difference is not an ordinary optimization error; it is a sufficiency gap caused by marginalization over an unobserved state. We then formalize retrieval, tool use, and external grounding through an auxiliary binary signal with fidelity $γ\in [1/2,1]$. The resulting Bayesian update yields a contextual dominance threshold: a corrective signal reverses the posterior odds induced by the textual history exactly when its fidelity exceeds the text-only posterior weight assigned to the misleading regime. This threshold reduces, but does not generally eliminate, the sufficiency gap; complete closure requires perfect revelation of the relevant latent state or an equivalent verification mechanism. The analysis clarifies why temperature scaling cannot restore missing context, why grounding mechanisms must be both informative and learnably usable by the model, and why autonomous sequence models require structurally decoupled observers or verifiers in high-stakes domains.
4.3CLMay 22
When Is Next-Token Prediction Useful? Marginalization, Ergodicity, Mixture Identifiability, Local Sufficiency, RAG, Tools, and ProgrammingFrancesco Corielli
Language models trained on observed sequences are often described as learning the conditional distribution of the next token given previous tokens. This description is only conditionally correct. A model trained on realized token trajectories does not observe full conditional laws; it receives sampled continuations. Moreover, real language generation is conditioned not only on previous words but also on non-textual circumstances: facts, events, intentions, goals, beliefs, social context, and task-specific constraints. This paper distinguishes three objects that are often conflated: the full conditional language process conditioned on latent circumstances, the marginal text-only process obtained by integrating those circumstances out, and the model-induced distribution learned from finite observed corpora. The paper argues that interpreting model training as estimating the marginal text-only law requires strong assumptions of stationarity, representativeness, and ergodicity, assumptions that are standard in statistical estimation but problematic when applied to heterogeneous language corpora. Even if these assumptions hold, the marginal text-only law is useful only when the observed prefix is an approximately sufficient statistic for the latent circumstances relevant to continuation. In information-theoretic terms, usefulness requires that the residual conditional mutual information between the next token and the omitted circumstances, given the observed text, be small. The paper then extends this argument to heterogeneous training corpora. Finally, the paper interprets Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) and tool use as conditional sufficiency devices.