mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Data Repetition Beats Data Scaling in Long-CoT Supervised Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2602.11149 ↗First posted 11 Feb 2026cs.CLcited by 7

On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking

Abstract (arXiv)

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on chain-of-thought data is an essential post-training step for reasoning language models. Standard machine learning intuition suggests that training with more unique training samples yields better generalization. Counterintuitively, we show that SFT benefits from repetition: under a fixed update budget, training for more epochs on smaller datasets outperforms single-epoch training on larger datasets. On AIME'24/25 and GPQA benchmarks, Olmo3-7B trained for 128 epochs on 400 samples outperforms the equivalent 1 epoch on 51200 samples by 12-26 percentage points, with no additional catastrophic forgetting. We find that training token accuracy reliably signals when repetition has saturated; improvements from additional epochs plateau at full memorization, a pattern consistent across all settings. These findings provide a practical approach for reasoning SFT, where scaling epochs with token accuracy as a stopping criterion can replace expensive undirected data scaling. We pose the repetition advantage, where full memorization coincides with improved generalization, as a new open problem for the community in understanding the training dynamics of large language models.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 16 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Feb 2026.

Builds on

16 of 28 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025s1: Simple test-time scaling31 Jan

Other references · 15

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  3. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  4. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  5. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  6. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
  7. 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 2,927
  8. 2017A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networkscited by 936
  9. 2025LIMO: Less is More for Reasoningcited by 488
  10. 2019Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tailcited by 452
  11. 2023Scaling Data-Constrained Language Modelscited by 391
  12. 2022Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Modelscited by 218
3 more
  1. 2025Olmo 3cited by 95
  2. 2018Data augmentation instead of explicit regularizationcited by 62
  3. 2025Diffusion Language Models are Super Data Learnerscited by 45

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Enhancing Large Language Model Reasoning via Selective Critical Token Fine-Tuning
  2. 2026Reasoning Quality Emerges Early: Data Curation for Reasoning Models
  3. 2025Mitigating Forgetting Between Supervised and Reinforcement Learning Yields Stronger Reasoners
  4. 2026Theoretical Perspectives on Data Quality and Synergistic Effects in Pre- and Post-Training Reasoning Models
  5. 2025Long-Short Chain-of-Thought Mixture Supervised Fine-Tuning Eliciting Efficient Reasoning in Large Language Models
  6. 2025UFT: Unifying Supervised and Reinforcement Fine-Tuning
  7. 2025Complexity-aware fine-tuning
  8. 2023Scaling Relationship on Learning Mathematical Reasoning with Large Language Models