Analysing Dropout and Compounding Errors in Neural Language Models

James O' Neill; Danushka Bollegala

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1811.00998

Analysing Dropout and Compounding Errors in Neural Language Models

James O' Neill·Danushka Bollegala

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper carries out an empirical analysis of various dropout techniques for language modelling, such as Bernoulli dropout, Gaussian dropout, Curriculum Dropout, Variational Dropout and Concrete Dropout. Moreover, we propose an extension of variational dropout to concrete dropout and curriculum dropout with varying schedules. We find these extensions to perform well when compared to standard dropout approaches, particularly variational curriculum dropout with a linear schedule. Largest performance increases are made when applying dropout on the decoder layer. Lastly, we analyze where most of the errors occur at test time as a post-analysis step to determine if the well-known problem of compounding errors is apparent and to what end do the proposed methods mitigate this issue for each dataset. We report results on a 2-hidden layer LSTM, GRU and Highway network with embedding dropout, dropout on the gated hidden layers and the output projection layer for each model. We report our results on Penn-TreeBank and WikiText-2 word-level language modelling datasets, where the former reduces the long-tail distribution through preprocessing and one which preserves rare words in the training and test set.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL cs.LG cs.NE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

James O' Neill, Danushka Bollegala. 2018-11-02. Analysing Dropout and Compounding Errors in Neural Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.00998

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

DA-Cramming: Enhancing Cost-Effective Language Model Pretraining with Dependency Agreement Integration

Pretraining language models is still a challenge for many researchers due to its substantial computational costs. As such, there is growing interest in developing more affordable pretraining methods. One notable advancement in this area is the Cramming technique (Geiping and Goldstein, 2022), which enables the pretraining of BERT-style language models using just one GPU in a single day. Building on this innovative approach, we introduce the Dependency Agreement Cramming (DA-Cramming), an efficient framework that integrates information about dependency agreements into the pretraining process. Unlike existing methods that leverage similar semantic information during finetuning, our approach represents a pioneering effort focusing on enhancing the foundational language understanding with semantic information during pretraining. We meticulously design a dual-stage pretraining work flow with four dedicated submodels to capture representative dependency agreements at the chunk level, effectively transforming these agreements into embeddings to benefit the pretraining. Extensive empirical results demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms previous methods across various tasks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

BigO(Bench): Can LLMs Generate Code with Controlled Time and Space Complexity?

We introduce BigO(Bench), a novel coding benchmark designed to evaluate the capabilities of generative language models in understanding and generating code with specified time and space complexities. This benchmark addresses the gap in current evaluations that often overlook the ability of models to comprehend and produce code constrained by computational complexity. BigO(Bench) includes tooling to infer the algorithmic complexity of any Python function from profiling measurements, including human- or LLM-generated solutions. BigO(Bench) also includes of set of 3,105 coding problems and 1,190,250 solutions from Code Contests annotated with inferred (synthetic) time and space complexity labels from the complexity framework, as well as corresponding runtime and memory footprint values for a large set of input sizes. We present results from evaluating multiple state-of-the-art language models on this benchmark, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses in handling complexity requirements. In particular, token-space reasoning models are unrivaled in code generation but not in complexity understanding, hinting that they may not generalize well to tasks for which no reward was given at training time.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

UR$^2$: Unify RAG and Reasoning through Reinforcement Learning

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong capabilities through two complementary paradigms: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) for knowledge grounding and Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) for complex reasoning. However, existing attempts to unify these paradigms remain narrow in scope, typically limited to open-domain QA with fixed retrieval settings, which constrains generalization to broader domains. To address this limitation, we propose UR$^2$ (Unified RAG and Reasoning)), a general reinforcement learning framework that dynamically coordinates retrieval and reasoning. UR$^2$ introduces two key designs: a difficulty-aware curriculum that selectively invokes retrieval only for challenging instances, and a hybrid knowledge access strategy that combines domain-specific offline corpora with on-the-fly LLM-generated summaries. Together, these components mitigate the imbalance between retrieval and reasoning and improve robustness to noisy information. Experiments on open-domain QA, MMLU-Pro, medical, and mathematical reasoning tasks show that UR$^2$, built on Qwen-2.5-3/7B and LLaMA-3.1-8B, consistently outperforms existing RAG and RL baselines, and achieves performance comparable to GPT-4o-mini and GPT-4.1-mini on several benchmarks. Code, models, and data are available at https://github.com/Tsinghua-dhy/UR2.

cs.CL↗