Repetition Mismatch: Why Data Mixture Experiments Don't Scale and How to Fix Them
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:Repetition Mismatch: Why Data Mixture Experiments Don't Scale and How to Fix Them
Abstract:Pre-training data mixtures are commonly tuned by running small-scale experiments and extrapolating to the target training budget. When high-quality data is scarce and must be repeated, this extrapolation frequently fails, but the source of the failure has not been isolated. We show that a primary culprit is a repetition mismatch: because high-quality datasets are small, their repetition rate changes as the training budget grows, shifting the optimal mixture in ways that small-scale proxy experiments do not anticipate. A subsampling procedure that matches the target repetition rate controls for this effect. In a two-source setting combining limited high-quality data with web crawl, a single repetition-controlled experiment using only 1/16 of the target tokens recovers a mixture within 0.05 of the optimum for a 757M parameter model, compared to an error of 0.75 without repetition control. Achieving comparable accuracy without repetition control requires three to four horizons, consuming 44 to 94% of the target token budget. With three data sources, the larger mixture space requires more than a single experiment to constrain, but the approach remains effective: at the 757M scale, just two repetition-controlled horizons recover the optimal mixture, outperforming baselines that instead require the full two-source experiments to construct. Our results reveal that repetition dynamics, not scale alone, shape whether small-scale mixture experiments generalize. More broadly, they suggest that data repetition deserves treatment as a first-class variable in mixture optimization, rather than an inconvenient side effect of limited data.
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2606.07597 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2606.07597v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.07597
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — Machine Learning
-
Offline Reinforcement Learning for Plasma Control in Nuclear Fusion: Codebase and Benchmark
Jun 9
-
MedicalRec: Medical recommender system for image classification without retraining
Jun 9
-
SPIN: Decentralized Swarm Control via Tensorized Policy Coordination
Jun 9
-
Boundary Variance Inflation Causes Acquisition Bias in Gaussian Processes
Jun 9
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.