mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Optimal Embedding Learning Rate in LLMs: The Effect of Vocabulary Size

arXiv 2506.15025 ↗First posted 17 Jun 2025cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Pretraining large language models is a costly process. To make this process more efficient, several methods have been proposed to optimize model architecture/parametrization and hardware use. On the parametrization side, μ P (Maximal Update Parametrization) parametrizes model weights and learning rate (LR) in a way that makes hyperparameters (HPs) transferable with width (embedding dimension): HPs can be tuned for a small model and used for larger models without additional tuning. While μP showed impressive results in practice, recent empirical studies have reported conflicting observations when applied to LLMs. One limitation of the theory behind μP is the fact that input dimension (vocabulary size in LLMs) is considered fixed when taking the width to infinity. This is unrealistic since vocabulary size is generally much larger than width in practice. In this work, we provide a theoretical analysis of the effect of vocabulary size on training dynamics, and subsequently show that as vocabulary size increases, the training dynamics interpolate between the μP regime and another regime that we call Large Vocab (LV) Regime, where optimal scaling rules are different from those predicted by μP. Our analysis reveals that in the LV regime, the optimal embedding LR to hidden LR ratio should roughly scale as Theta(√width), surprisingly close to the empirical findings previously reported in the literature, and different from the Theta(width) ratio predicted by μP. We conduct several experiments to validate our theory, and pretrain a 1B model from scratch to show the benefit of our suggested scaling rule for the embedding LR.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2025.

Builds on

18 of 25 references.

References · 18

  1. 2015Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classificationcited by 3,611
  2. 2016Pointer Sentinel Mixture Modelscited by 3,096
  3. 2018Neural Tangent Kernel: Convergence and Generalization in Neural Networkscited by 2,621
  4. 2024Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phonecited by 1,917
  5. 2018On Lazy Training in Differentiable Programmingcited by 675
  6. 2022Tensor Programs V: Tuning Large Neural Networks via Zero-Shot Hyperparameter Transfercited by 288
  7. 2016Exponential expressivity in deep neural networks through transient chaoscited by 261
  8. 2016Deep Information Propagationcited by 195
  9. 2019Scaling Limits of Wide Neural Networks with Weight Sharing: Gaussian Process Behavior, Gradient Independence, and Neural Tangent Kernel Derivationcited by 149
  10. 2024Scaling Laws with Vocabulary: Larger Models Deserve Larger Vocabulariescited by 118
  11. 2019On the Impact of the Activation Function on Deep Neural Networks Trainingcited by 102
  12. 2023Tensor Programs VI: Feature Learning in Infinite-Depth Neural Networkscited by 97
6 more
  1. 2024How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training?cited by 73
  2. 2023Depthwise Hyperparameter Transfer in Residual Networks: Dynamics and Scaling Limitcited by 66
  3. 2020Stable ResNetcited by 49
  4. 2022On the infinite-depth limit of finite-width neural networkscited by 22
  5. 2022Infinite-width limit of deep linear neural networkscited by 20
  6. 2024An Empirical Study of μP Learning Rate Transfercited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 5.

6 papers.