On the State of the Art of Evaluation in Neural Language Models
About
Ongoing innovations in recurrent neural network architectures have provided a steady influx of apparently state-of-the-art results on language modelling benchmarks. However, these have been evaluated using differing code bases and limited computational resources, which represent uncontrolled sources of experimental variation. We reevaluate several popular architectures and regularisation methods with large-scale automatic black-box hyperparameter tuning and arrive at the somewhat surprising conclusion that standard LSTM architectures, when properly regularised, outperform more recent models. We establish a new state of the art on the Penn Treebank and Wikitext-2 corpora, as well as strong baselines on the Hutter Prize dataset.
G\'abor Melis, Chris Dyer, Phil Blunsom• 2017
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Language Modeling | WikiText-2 (test) | PPL65.9 | 1541 | |
| Language Modeling | PTB (test) | Perplexity58.3 | 471 | |
| Language Modeling | Penn Treebank (test) | Perplexity58.3 | 411 | |
| Language Modeling | WikiText2 v1 (test) | Perplexity65.9 | 341 | |
| Language Modeling | WikiText2 (val) | Perplexity (PPL)69.1 | 277 | |
| Character-level Language Modeling | enwik8 (test) | BPC1.626 | 195 | |
| Language Modeling | Penn Treebank (val) | Perplexity60.9 | 178 | |
| Language Modeling | PTB (val) | Perplexity60.9 | 83 | |
| Language Modeling | Penn Treebank word-level (test) | Perplexity58.3 | 72 | |
| Character-level Language Modeling | Hutter Prize Wikipedia (test) | Bits/Char1.3 | 28 |
Showing 10 of 15 rows