mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Revisiting the Scaling Properties of Downstream Metrics in Large Language Model Training

arXiv 2512.08894 ↗First posted 9 Dec 2025cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

While scaling laws for Large Language Models (LLMs) traditionally focus on proxy metrics like pretraining loss, predicting downstream task performance has been considered unreliable. This paper challenges that view by proposing a direct framework to model the scaling of benchmark performance from the training budget. We find that for a fixed token-to-parameter ratio, a simple power law can accurately describe the scaling behavior of log accuracy on multiple popular downstream tasks. Our results show that the direct approach extrapolates better than the previously proposed two-stage procedure, which is prone to compounding errors. Furthermore, we introduce functional forms that predict accuracy across token-to-parameter ratios and account for inference compute under repeated sampling. We validate our findings on models with up to 17B parameters trained on up to 350B tokens across two dataset mixtures. To support reproducibility and encourage future research, we release the complete set of pretraining losses and downstream evaluation results.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Dec 2025.

Builds on

28 of 41 references.

References · 28

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  2. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  3. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  4. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  5. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
  6. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
  7. 2021RoFormer: Enhanced Transformer with Rotary Position Embeddingcited by 4,581
  8. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
  9. 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,895
  10. 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,818
  11. 2022Emergent Abilities of Large Language Modelscited by 2,483
  12. 2020GLU Variants Improve Transformercited by 1,724
16 more
  1. 2016The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse contextcited by 960
  2. 2017Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questionscited by 742
  3. 2020Scaling Laws for Autoregressive Generative Modelingcited by 510
  4. 2023Small-scale proxies for large-scale Transformer training instabilitiescited by 182
  5. 2025AIMO-2 Winning Solution: Building State-of-the-Art Mathematical Reasoning Models with OpenMathReasoning datasetcited by 165
  6. 2024Language models scale reliably with over-training and on downstream taskscited by 105
  7. 2022Broken Neural Scaling Lawscited by 102
  8. 2024Understanding Emergent Abilities of Language Models from the Loss Perspectivecited by 94
  9. 2024How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training?cited by 68
  10. 2024Scaling Laws for Predicting Downstream Performance in LLMscited by 48
  11. 2025Power Lines: Scaling Laws for Weight Decay and Batch Size in LLM Pre-trainingcited by 41
  12. 2024Why Has Predicting Downstream Capabilities of Frontier AI Models with Scale Remained Elusive?cited by 39
  13. 2025DataDecide: How to Predict Best Pretraining Data with Small Experimentscited by 36
  14. 2024Establishing Task Scaling Laws via Compute-Efficient Model Ladderscited by 32
  15. 2024Loss-to-Loss Prediction: Scaling Laws for All Datasetscited by 15
  16. 2024Time Transfer: On Optimal Learning Rate and Batch Size In The Infinite Data Limitcited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.

6 papers.