Are you using test log-likelihood correctly?

Test log-likelihood, also known as predictive log-likelihood or test log-predictive, is computed as the log-predictive density averaged over a set of held-out data. It is often used to compare different models of the same data or to compare different algorithms used to fit the same probabilistic model. Although there are compelling reasons for this practice (Section 2.1), we provide examples that falsify the following, usually implicit, claims: Claim: The higher the test log-likelihood, the more accurately an approximate inference algorithm recovers the Bayesian posterior distribution of latent model parameters (Section 3). Claim: The higher the test log-likelihood, the better the predictive performance on held-out data according to other measurements, like root mean squared error (Section 4). Our examples demonstrate that test log-likelihood is not always a good proxy for posterior approximation error. They further demonstrate that forecast evaluations based on test log-likelihood may not agree with forecast evaluations based on root mean squared error. We are not the first to highlight discrepancies between test log-likelihood and other analysis objectives. For instance, Quiñonero-Candela et al. (2005) and Kohonen and Suomela (2005) showed that when predicting discrete data with continuous distributions, test log-likelihood can be made arbitrarily large by concentrating probability into vanishingly small intervals. Chang et al. (2009) observed