Computational Budget Should Be Considered in Data Selection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Data selection improves computational efficiency by choosing informative subsets of training samples. However, existing methods ignore the compute budget, treating data selection and importance evaluation independently of compute budget constraints. Yet empirical studies show no algorithm can consistently outperform others (or even random selection) across varying budgets. We therefore argue that compute budget must be integral to data-selection strategies, since different budgets impose distinct requirements on data quantity, quality, and distribution for effective training. To this end, we propose a novel Computational budget-Aware Data Selection (CADS) method and naturally formulate it into a bilevel optimization framework, where the inner loop trains the model within the constraints of the computational budget on some selected subset of training data, while the outer loop optimizes data selection based on model evaluation. Our technical contributions lie in addressing two main challenges in solving this bilevel optimization problem: the expensive Hessian matrix estimation for outer-loop gradients and the computational burden of achieving inner-loop optimality during iterations. To solve the first issue, we propose a probabilistic reparameterization strategy and compute the gradient using a Hessian-free policy gradient estimator. To address the second challenge, we transform the inner optimization problem into a penalty term in the outer objective, further discovering that we only need to estimate the minimum of a one-dimensional loss to calculate the gradient, significantly improving efficiency. Extensive experiments show that our method achieves performance gains of up to 14.42% over baselines in vision and language benchmarks.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 53 of its 71 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Oct 2025.
Builds on
53 of 71 references.
References · 53
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
- 2018DARTS: Differentiable Architecture Searchcited by 1,798
- 2018On the Spectral Bias of Neural Networkscited by 1,341
- 2018Moment Matching for Multi-Source Domain Adaptationcited by 1,331
- 2023Instruction Tuning with GPT-4cited by 686
- 2018An Empirical Study of Example Forgetting during Deep Neural Network Learningcited by 678
- 2019Deep Batch Active Learning by Diverse, Uncertain Gradient Lower Boundscited by 610
- 2021Deep Learning on a Data Diet: Finding Important Examples Early in Trainingcited by 533
- 2020UnifiedQA: Crossing Format Boundaries With a Single QA Systemcited by 476
- 2022Dataset Distillation by Matching Training Trajectoriescited by 442
- 2018Bilevel Programming for Hyperparameter Optimization and Meta-Learningcited by 405
38 more
- 2023What Makes Good Data for Alignment? A Comprehensive Study of Automatic Data Selection in Instruction Tuningcited by 364
- 2015Gradient-based Hyperparameter Optimization through Reversible Learningcited by 360
- 2018Not All Samples Are Created Equal: Deep Learning with Importance Samplingcited by 328
- 2023From Quantity to Quality: Boosting LLM Performance with Self-Guided Data Selection for Instruction Tuningcited by 307
- 2019Optimizing Millions of Hyperparameters by Implicit Differentiationcited by 304
- 2019On The Power of Curriculum Learning in Training Deep Networkscited by 286
- 2021GRAD-MATCH: Gradient Matching based Data Subset Selection for Efficient Deep Model Trainingcited by 274
- 2021Curriculum Learning: A Surveycited by 259
- 2018Approximation Methods for Bilevel Programmingcited by 236
- 2017Forward and Reverse Gradient-Based Hyperparameter Optimizationcited by 234
- 2016Hyperparameter optimization with approximate gradientcited by 233
- 2020Bilevel Optimization: Convergence Analysis and Enhanced Designcited by 222
- 2018Truncated Back-propagation for Bilevel Optimizationcited by 190
- 2020On the Iteration Complexity of Hypergradient Computationcited by 155
- 2019Distributionally Robust Language Modelingcited by 143
- 2023Dataset Distillation: A Comprehensive Reviewcited by 127
- 2015Online Batch Selection for Faster Training of Neural Networkscited by 122
- 2023#InsTag: Instruction Tagging for Analyzing Supervised Fine-tuning of Large Language Modelscited by 109
- 2021A Near-Optimal Algorithm for Stochastic Bilevel Optimization via Double-Momentumcited by 106
- 2022BOME! Bilevel Optimization Made Easy: A Simple First-Order Approachcited by 105
- 2022Remember the Past: Distilling Datasets into Addressable Memories for Neural Networkscited by 104
- 2023A Fully First-Order Method for Stochastic Bilevel Optimizationcited by 100
- 2024Long Is More for Alignment: A Simple but Tough-to-Beat Baseline for Instruction Fine-Tuningcited by 85
- 2015Variance Reduction in SGD by Distributed Importance Samplingcited by 79
- 2024A Survey on Data Selection for LLM Instruction Tuningcited by 77
- 2021A Single-Timescale Method for Stochastic Bilevel Optimizationcited by 69
- 2023Active Instruction Tuning: Improving Cross-Task Generalization by Training on Prompt Sensitive Taskscited by 55
- 2023Model Agnostic Sample Reweighting for Out-of-Distribution Learningcited by 44
- 2024SmallToLarge (S2L): Scalable Data Selection for Fine-tuning Large Language Models by Summarizing Training Trajectories of Small Modelscited by 44
- 2024ScaleBiO: Scalable Bilevel Optimization for LLM Data Reweightingcited by 37
- 2021On the Convergence Theory for Hessian-Free Bilevel Algorithmscited by 35
- 2024Rethinking Data Selection for Supervised Fine-Tuningcited by 35
- 2023Data Portraits: Recording Foundation Model Training Datacited by 30
- 2024TAGCOS: Task-agnostic Gradient Clustered Coreset Selection for Instruction Tuning Datacited by 30
- 2023Probabilistic Bilevel Coreset Selectioncited by 27
- 2024Rethinking Data Selection at Scale: Random Selection is Almost All You Needcited by 22
- 2023Near-Optimal Nonconvex-Strongly-Convex Bilevel Optimization with Fully First-Order Oraclescited by 17
- 2024Chasing Random: Instruction Selection Strategies Fail to Generalizecited by 13
50 most cited of 53 All 53 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Rethinking Representativeness and Diversity in Dynamic Data Selection
- 2026PRISM: Preference-Aware Influence Function Based Data Selection Method for Efficient Fine-Tuning
- 2025From Data to Rewards: a Bilevel Optimization Perspective on Maximum Likelihood Estimation
- 2026When Sample Selection Bias Precipitates Model Collapse
- 2026Let Training Guide Selection: Online Synthetic Data Filtering via Real-Anchored Utility
- 2022Bilevel Optimization with a Lower-level Contraction: Optimal Sample Complexity without Warm-start
- 2025A First-order Generative Bilevel Optimization Framework for Diffusion Models
- 2025LEAD: Iterative Data Selection for Efficient LLM Instruction Tuning