mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Computational-Statistical Tradeoffs at the Next-Token Prediction Barrier: Autoregressive and Imitation Learning under Misspecification

arXiv 2502.12465 ↗First posted 18 Feb 2025cs.LG cs.DScited by 12

On the map: Offline RL and imitation learning from data → Language-conditioned policies and VLAs

Abstract (arXiv)

Next-token prediction with the logarithmic loss is a cornerstone of autoregressive sequence modeling, but, in practice, suffers from error amplification, where errors in the model compound and generation quality degrades as sequence length H increases. From a theoretical perspective, this phenomenon should not appear in well-specified settings, and, indeed, a growing body of empirical work hypothesizes that misspecification, where the learner is not sufficiently expressive to represent the target distribution, may be the root cause. Under misspecification -- where the goal is to learn as well as the best-in-class model up to a multiplicative approximation factor C≥ 1 -- we confirm that C indeed grows with H for next-token prediction, lending theoretical support to this empirical hypothesis. We then ask whether this mode of error amplification is avoidable algorithmically, computationally, or information-theoretically, and uncover inherent computational-statistical tradeoffs. We show: (1) Information-theoretically, one can avoid error amplification and achieve C=O(1). (2) Next-token prediction can be made robust so as to achieve C=tilde O(H), representing moderate error amplification, but this is an inherent barrier: any next-token prediction-style objective must suffer C=Omega(H). (3) For the natural testbed of autoregressive linear models, no computationally efficient algorithm can achieve sub-polynomial approximation factor C=e^(log H)1-Omega(1); however, at least for binary token spaces, one can smoothly trade compute for statistical power and improve on C=Omega(H) in sub-exponential time. Our results have consequences in the more general setting of imitation learning, where the widely-used behavior cloning algorithm generalizes next-token prediction.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Language-conditioned policies and VLAs, one of 13 directions in Offline RL and imitation learning from data. Builds on 19 of its 85 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Feb 2025.

Builds on

19 of 85 references.

References · 19

  1. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  2. 2015Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Networkcited by 10,076
  3. 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,175
  4. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  5. 2023Diffusion Policy: Visuomotor Policy Learning via Action Diffusioncited by 2,730
  6. 2023Learning Fine-Grained Bimanual Manipulation with Low-Cost Hardwarecited by 1,490
  7. 2018ChauffeurNet: Learning to Drive by Imitating the Best and Synthesizing the Worstcited by 391
  8. 2015Unifying distillation and privileged informationcited by 218
  9. 2021The Statistical Complexity of Interactive Decision Makingcited by 208
  10. 2024The pitfalls of next-token predictioncited by 156
  11. 2014Reinforcement and Imitation Learning via Interactive No-Regret Learningcited by 116
  12. 2023Robot Parkour Learningcited by 115
7 more
  1. 2021Feedback in Imitation Learning: The Three Regimes of Covariate Shiftcited by 68
  2. 2024DextrAH-G: Pixels-to-Action Dexterous Arm-Hand Grasping with Geometric Fabricscited by 36
  3. 2023Foundations of Reinforcement Learning and Interactive Decision Makingcited by 33
  4. 2019Lecture Notes: Selected topics on robust statistical learning theorycited by 17
  5. 2021Provably Breaking the Quadratic Error Compounding Barrier in Imitation Learning, Optimallycited by 12
  6. 2024Online Estimation via Offline Estimation: An Information-Theoretic Frameworkcited by 11
  7. 2024Exploration is Harder than Prediction: Cryptographically Separating Reinforcement Learning from Supervised Learningcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 8; 2026: 4.

12 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Where is the signal in tokenization space?
  2. 2026Sample Complexity of Autoregressive Reasoning: Chain-of-Thought vs. End-to-End
  3. 2023SequenceMatch: Imitation Learning for Autoregressive Sequence Modelling with Backtracking
  4. 2025Unifying Autoregressive and Diffusion-Based Sequence Generation
  5. 2024Diffusion Forcing: Next-token Prediction Meets Full-Sequence Diffusion
  6. 2026Autoregressive Learning in Joint KL: Sharp Oracle Bounds and Lower Bounds
  7. 2025How Reinforcement Learning After Next-Token Prediction Facilitates Learning
  8. 2026ALoDLM: Adaptively Looped Diffusion Language Models