Scaling Laws Revisited: Modeling the Role of Data Quality in Language Model Pretraining
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Scaling laws for language model training traditionally characterize how performance scales with model size and dataset volume. Prior work has explored architecture variants and data treatments such as dataset filtering and noise injection in language model pretraining; however, these studies have not formalized data quality within a principled scaling law. We introduce a dimensionless data-quality parameter Q, and propose a quality-aware scaling law extending the Chinchilla framework to predict loss as a joint function of model size, data volume, and data quality. The law is motivated by an effective-sample-size and information-theoretic view of noisy or redundant corpora, and it admits two practical estimators for Q: (i) a corruption rate proxy and (ii) a deficiency measure. Through synthetic experiments in neural machine translation and autoregressive modeling -- where we systematically control data quality via multiple levels of noise injection variation -- we show that loss scales predictably with data quality and that higher-quality data can substantially reduce model size and hence compute requirements. Our results demonstrate a sublinear decay of effective data with quality and robustness to moderate data corruption; out-of-sample evaluations further validate the predictive form of the law. Unlike prior empirical analyses, our work establishes an explicit, generalizable law for data quality, offering concrete guidance for balancing data curation effort and model scale in large-scale pretraining.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2025.
Builds on
25 of 43 references.
References · 25
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 2,927
- 2023FlashAttention-2: Faster Attention with Better Parallelism and Work Partitioningcited by 2,551
- 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,346
- 2019HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processingcited by 2,201
- 2016Bag of Tricks for Efficient Text Classificationcited by 869
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 705
- 2022Beyond neural scaling laws: beating power law scaling via data pruningcited by 519
- 2020Scaling Laws for Autoregressive Generative Modelingcited by 510
- 2021Documenting Large Webtext Corpora: A Case Study on the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpuscited by 481
- 2024Dolma: an Open Corpus of Three Trillion Tokens for Language Model Pretraining Researchcited by 475
- 2021Explaining Neural Scaling Lawscited by 353
13 more
- 2017Information-theoretic analysis of generalization capability of learning algorithmscited by 299
- 2024Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for Problem-Solving with Language Modelscited by 282
- 2022Data Contamination: From Memorization to Exploitationcited by 234
- 2022Revisiting Neural Scaling Laws in Language and Visioncited by 129
- 2019Tightening Mutual Information Based Bounds on Generalization Errorcited by 117
- 2024Scaling Laws with Vocabulary: Larger Models Deserve Larger Vocabulariescited by 113
- 2021Scaling Laws for Neural Machine Translationcited by 110
- 2022Broken Neural Scaling Lawscited by 102
- 2024Scaling Laws for Data Filtering -- Data Curation cannot be Compute Agnosticcited by 74
- 2022Data Scaling Laws in NMT: The Effect of Noise and Architecturecited by 55
- 2022Scaling Laws Under the Microscope: Predicting Transformer Performance from Small Scale Experimentscited by 23
- 2024ScalingFilter: Assessing Data Quality through Inverse Utilization of Scaling Lawscited by 15
- 2024Scaling Parameter-Constrained Language Models with Quality Datacited by 12
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.