arXiv Machine Learning

Does Step Law Transfer to Small-Scale Language Models? An Empirical Recalibration Below 59M Parameters

arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 23

Practical Scaling Laws: Converting Compute into Performance in a Data-Constrained World

The paper introduces a new closed‑form scaling law that extends Chinchilla’s original formula to handle data‑constrained regimes. It decomposes loss into undercapacity, undertraining, and overfitting components, saturating between an irreducible loss and an uninformed baseline. The authors validate the model on diverse architectures and domains, achieving state‑of‑the‑art RMSE across multiple LLM scaling‑law grids and enabling cost‑aware training allocations.

By Christopher M. Bryant, Hao Liu
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 24

Linear RNN Scaling Laws: When Longer Sequences Beat More Sequences

The paper presents empirical scaling laws for autoregressive language models, linking prediction loss to model size, data size, and compute, and investigates their theoretical basis using a teacher–student linear RNN framework. In this tractable setting, a stable latent linear RNN generates trajectories while a sketched linear recurrent student is trained via full‑batch WSD gradient descent on next‑token prediction. The study derives explicit approximation, optimization, and statistical scaling laws that depend on the sketch dimension, number of trajectories, and trajectory length, revealing how different power‑law exponents for innovation and initialization covariances affect the rates and crossovers between regimes.

By Ziyan Chen, Zhongzhu Zhou, Peilin Liu, Ding-Xuan Zhou
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 20

Learned, Then Lost: A Measured Single-Example Counterfactual in Pre-training

The study measured the impact of a single training example on a GPT‑2 model by running 24 counterfactual experiments. 32 models were trained from scratch on OpenWebText, and at a specific training step a single batch row was replaced with a 194‑token passage under three conditions (fluent prose, fabricated subject, random characters) or left unchanged. Results showed that the passage was learned from one exposure and decayed, with measurable differences in cross‑entropy up to 50 steps after injection but no lasting effect at the final step.

By Zachary Speck, Asa Shepard