When Models Don't Collapse: On the Consistency of Iterative MLE
This addresses concerns about the reliability of iterative generative modeling for researchers and practitioners, providing rigorous theoretical insights into when collapse occurs.
The paper tackles the problem of model collapse in generative models trained iteratively on synthetic data, showing theoretically that under standard assumptions, collapse can be avoided even with vanishing real data, but without certain assumptions, collapse can occur arbitrarily quickly.
The widespread use of generative models has created a feedback loop, in which each generation of models is trained on data partially produced by its predecessors. This process has raised concerns about model collapse: A critical degradation in performance caused by repeated training on synthetic data. However, different analyses in the literature have reached different conclusions as to the severity of model collapse. As such, it remains unclear how concerning this phenomenon is, and under which assumptions it can be avoided. To address this, we theoretically study model collapse for maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), in a natural setting where synthetic data is gradually added to the original data set. Under standard assumptions (similar to those long used for proving asymptotic consistency and normality of MLE), we establish non-asymptotic bounds showing that collapse can be avoided even as the fraction of real data vanishes. On the other hand, we prove that some assumptions (beyond MLE consistency) are indeed necessary: Without them, model collapse can occur arbitrarily quickly, even when the original data is still present in the training set. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first rigorous examples of iterative generative modeling with accumulating data that rapidly leads to model collapse.