Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the efficacy of classifier inversion methods in concept-bottleneck text generation, focusing on multi-axis compositional generalization. By comparing bare classifier inversion with regularized variants and a simple post-hoc prior, the authors reveal that all inversion methods significantly underperform the post-hoc approach, with the bare inversion collapsing to chance due to off-manifold code issues. These findings highlight the limitations of current inversion techniques and suggest that simpler methods may yield better results in controllable text generation.
Classifier inversion methods fail dramatically in concept-bottleneck text generation, often collapsing to chance performance.
Concept-bottleneck controllable generation routes multi-attribute control through a low-dimensional concept code that, at deployment, must be synthesised from a target attribute configuration. We study this problem in concept-bottleneck text generation under multi-axis compositional generalisation, comparing three ways to obtain the inference-time code: classifier inversion against the encoder heads, reference-text encoding, and a post-hoc label-conditioned prior. Since a concept code admits no direct LM-fluency term, regularising inversion must instead constrain the code toward the encoder's training distribution. We therefore test bare inversion and three regularised variants: label-agnostic and label-conditioned Mahalanobis penalties, and a conditional normalising-flow density baseline. Every inversion variant we test underperforms a simple post-hoc prior fitted to per-combination encoder means on the same checkpoints, across three backbone families spanning $124$M to $8$B parameters. The bare form of classifier inversion also silently collapses to chance, traceable to a directly measured off-manifold code. We validate this diagnosis on real-world benchmarks and under external evaluators, enabling fair comparison with published baselines.