What is Wrong with Perplexity for Long-context Language Modeling?

Handling long-context inputs is crucial for large language models (LLMs) in tasks such as extended conversations, document summarization, and many-shot in-context learning. While recent approaches have extended the context windows of LLMs and employed perplexity (PPL) as a standard evaluation metric, PPL has proven unreliable for assessing long-context capabilities. The underlying cause of this limitation has remained unclear. In this work, we provide a comprehensive explanation for this issue. We find that PPL overlooks key tokens, which are essential for long-context understanding, by averaging across all tokens and thereby obscuring the true performance of models in long-context scenarios. To address this, we propose \textbf{LongPPL}, a novel metric that focuses on key tokens by employing a long-short context contrastive method to identify them. Our experiments demonstrate that LongPPL strongly correlates with performance on various long-context benchmarks (e.g., Pearson correlation of -0.96), significantly outperforming traditional PPL in predictive accuracy. Additionally, we introduce \textbf{LongCE} (Long-context Cross-Entropy) loss, a re-weighting strategy for fine-tuning that prioritizes key tokens, leading to consistent improvements across diverse benchmarks. In summary, these contributions offer deeper insights into the limitations of PPL and present effective solutions for accurately evaluating and enhancing the long-context capabilities of LLMs. Code is available atthis https URL.

@article{fang2025_2410.23771,
  title={ What is Wrong with Perplexity for Long-context Language Modeling? },
  author={ Lizhe Fang and Yifei Wang and Zhaoyang Liu and Chenheng Zhang and Stefanie Jegelka and Jinyang Gao and Bolin Ding and Yisen Wang },
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.23771},
  year={ 2025 }
}