REVIEW 8 cited by
Beyond neural scaling laws: beating power law scaling via data pruning
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Beyond neural scaling laws: beating power law scaling via data pruning
read the original abstract
Widely observed neural scaling laws, in which error falls off as a power of the training set size, model size, or both, have driven substantial performance improvements in deep learning. However, these improvements through scaling alone require considerable costs in compute and energy. Here we focus on the scaling of error with dataset size and show how in theory we can break beyond power law scaling and potentially even reduce it to exponential scaling instead if we have access to a high-quality data pruning metric that ranks the order in which training examples should be discarded to achieve any pruned dataset size. We then test this improved scaling prediction with pruned dataset size empirically, and indeed observe better than power law scaling in practice on ResNets trained on CIFAR-10, SVHN, and ImageNet. Next, given the importance of finding high-quality pruning metrics, we perform the first large-scale benchmarking study of ten different data pruning metrics on ImageNet. We find most existing high performing metrics scale poorly to ImageNet, while the best are computationally intensive and require labels for every image. We therefore developed a new simple, cheap and scalable self-supervised pruning metric that demonstrates comparable performance to the best supervised metrics. Overall, our work suggests that the discovery of good data-pruning metrics may provide a viable path forward to substantially improved neural scaling laws, thereby reducing the resource costs of modern deep learning.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Promptbreeder: Self-Referential Self-Improvement Via Prompt Evolution
Promptbreeder evolves both task prompts and the mutation prompts that improve them using LLMs, outperforming Chain-of-Thought and Plan-and-Solve on arithmetic and commonsense reasoning benchmarks.
-
Data Turnstile: A Scalable Open Framework for Function-Calling Data Generation
A stepwise synthetic-data generation framework lets small language models (0.6B-4B) beat zero-shot 32B models on function-calling benchmarks after fine-tuning.
-
Foundation Models for Discovery and Exploration in Chemical Space
MIST models up to 10x larger than prior work, fine-tuned on over 400 structure-property tasks, match or exceed SOTA on benchmarks and demonstrate zero-shot olfactory perception mapping consistent with hyperbolic geometry.
-
SalUn: Empowering Machine Unlearning via Gradient-based Weight Saliency in Both Image Classification and Generation
SalUn uses gradient-based weight saliency to achieve effective machine unlearning of data, classes, or concepts in image classification and generation, narrowing the gap to exact retraining.
-
Nougat: Neural Optical Understanding for Academic Documents
Nougat applies a visual transformer to convert academic PDFs into markup language while accurately handling mathematical content on a new scientific document dataset.
-
Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models
Repeating training data up to 4 epochs yields negligible loss increase versus unique data for fixed compute, and a new scaling law accounts for the decaying value of repeated tokens and excess parameters.
-
Epistemic diversity across language models mitigates knowledge collapse
In repeated self-training loops on Wikitext2, ecosystems of four small language models show lower average perplexity than one, two, or sixteen models, but the paper's broader claims about monotonic optima, robustness,...
-
Revisiting Training Scale: An Empirical Study of Token Count, Power Consumption, and Parameter Efficiency
The paper's finding that training efficiency declines monotonically with token count is guaranteed by its efficiency metric, which divides by token count and power consumption.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.