LLM responses are based on the internet (via training or RAG), and AI is now used to generate a significant amount of content online (Paredes et al., 2026), creating the potential for a self-reinforcing feedback loop. Prior work has shown that when LLMs are recursively trained on their own output, they experience model collapse (Shumailov et al., 2024): responses become less diverse, and eventually no longer resemble the original training data. In this paper, we show that a similar collapse occurs if LLM-based AI systems retrieve references they authored using a search tool. We call this RAG collapse. We conduct extensive experiments with three types of simulations of AI systems retrieving references they generated, using three model families, and 1,019 information-seeking prompts, totaling 1,528 simulations and over one million LLM API calls, and find that 79.6% (1,216/1,528) of simulations end in collapse. Surprisingly, even a single self-authored reference can trigger collapse because the LLM disproportionately cites its own content. This self-bias persists even after controlling for reference quality.
Irina Proskurina, Antoine Gourru, Julien Velcincs.CL
Generative models trained on artificially generated data have been shown to exhibit model collapse, resulting in significant performance degradation. As synthetic content increasingly contaminates the training corpora of language models, this raises critical concerns about the use of open data in continued pretraining. Although previous work has demonstrated model collapse in language models, it remains unclear whether exposure to synthetic data amplifies or attenuates the social biases already present in pretrained models. Because language models are known to reproduce and amplify demographic stereotypes, recursive training on self-generated data may create a self-reinforcing feedback loop in which biased associations become progressively stronger across generations. We call this hypothesized phenomenon fairness collapse. In this work, we construct controlled training regimes in which models are repeatedly trained on synthetic data using the Bias in Bios dataset. Across experiments, we observe a consistent and concerning pattern: fairness degradation emerges before substantial degradation is reflected by standard language-modeling metrics. This result highlights a critical risk associated with synthetic data contamination in language model training: bias can increase silently before strong indicators of model collapse become apparent.
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.
AI systems increasingly participate in their own improvement: revising their outputs, adapting their own harnesses during deployment, training on data they generate, and, increasingly, conducting AI research itself. This literature is described under a vocabulary ("self-refine," "self-reward," "self-play," "self-evolve") that conflates fundamentally different ambitions. We survey 1,250 arXiv papers (2024-2026) along two axes: what the system improves -- its behavior in deployment, its policy through training, its evaluator, or the research process itself -- and the degree of loop closure (human-in-the-loop to fully closed). The taxonomy separates bounded self-refinement -- convergent, evaluable, and already industrial practice -- from open-ended recursive self-improvement (RSI), which remains bounded by grounding requirements, collapse dynamics, and compute constraints on every measured axis. Its distinctive feature is a dedicated category for self-evaluation: every improvement loop is a claim that some signal can substitute for human judgment. We survey the evaluator design space -- judges, process reward models, verifiers, rubrics, meta-evaluation -- order the signals into a verification hierarchy from formal verifiers (strongest) to intrinsic self-assessment (weakest), and observe that demonstrated self-improvement strength tracks this hierarchy, that its failure modes (self-confirming loops, model collapse, diversity collapse) follow from its violations, and that the "research direction-setting" bottleneck keeping humans in the loop sits at the top of that hierarchy. We connect the technical literature to the theory of RSI limits and to the safety and governance questions raised by frontier-lab accounts of closing the loop, and identify governance-grade measurement of self-improvement as the field's most underpopulated niche.
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.
Driven by massive amounts of web-scale data, generative AI (GenAI) has achieved remarkable progress, enabling various applications in diverse sectors. The advances of GenAI have actuated practitioners to use AI-synthesized data for training next-generation AI models. Undeniably, using synthetic data has alleviated the increasing stringent demand for data supply. Unfortunately, it also introduces a new critical issue: in a self-consuming cycle between model and data, the model ultimately collapse, raising more trustworthiness concerns to GenAI. In recent years, increasingly more studies have investigated the phenomenon of model collapse (MC) and explored potential solutions to mitigate it. However, the review of the phenomenon of MC still remains blank. To fill this gap, this paper provides an up-to-date overview of these studies for consolidating and reviewing the progress of MC in different application scenarios and countermeasures for mitigating MC. We also highlight challenges and future research opportunities.
Naïl B. Khelifa, Richard E. Turner, Ramji Venkataramananstat.ML cs.LG
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.
Tim Nielen, Sameer Ambekar, Johannes Kiechle +2cs.LG cs.CV
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.