Prescriptive Scaling Laws for Data Constrained Training
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Training compute is increasingly outpacing the availability of high-quality data. This shifts the central challenge from optimal compute allocation to extracting maximum value from limited data. The widely adopted Chinchilla scaling law assumes every training token is unique. This limits its ability to guide pretraining decisions in data-constrained regimes. We model the excess loss under repetition with a simple additive overfitting penalty and find that it accurately describes model behavior. Our scaling law yields qualitatively new compute-optimal allocation advice. Beyond a point, further repetition is counterproductive and compute is better spent on model capacity. We show that following our law's recommended configuration improves performance in data-constrained regimes. Finally, because our one-parameter form isolates overfitting in a single coefficient, it enables direct comparison across training configurations. As a case study, we show that strong weight decay (λ=1.0) reduces this coefficient by approximately 70%, providing a scaling-law explanation for recent findings that optimal weight decay in data-constrained regimes is an order of magnitude larger than standard practice.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 May 2026.
Builds on
30 of 38 references.
References · 30
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 2,927
- 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,818
- 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,793
- 2022Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Modelscited by 1,359
- 2020What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Examscited by 1,324
- 2022Reproducible scaling laws for contrastive language-image learningcited by 1,163
- 2024The FineWeb Datasets: Decanting the Web for the Finest Text Data at Scalecited by 1,104
18 more
- 2016The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse contextcited by 960
- 2017Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questionscited by 742
- 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 674
- 2019Deep Double Descent: Where Bigger Models and More Data Hurtcited by 667
- 2022MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answeringcited by 525
- 2021A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Paperscited by 475
- 2023Scaling Data-Constrained Language Modelscited by 391
- 2024Scaling Laws for Fine-Grained Mixture of Expertscited by 166
- 2023Beyond Chinchilla-Optimal: Accounting for Inference in Language Model Scaling Lawscited by 155
- 2023Likelihood-Based Diffusion Language Modelscited by 147
- 2024LAB-Bench: Measuring Capabilities of Language Models for Biology Researchcited by 138
- 2023Scaling Laws for Generative Mixed-Modal Language Modelscited by 131
- 2024Language models scale reliably with over-training and on downstream taskscited by 105
- 2024OLMES: A Standard for Language Model Evaluationscited by 100
- 2024Scaling Laws for Precisioncited by 92
- 2024SciRIFF: A Resource to Enhance Language Model Instruction-Following over Scientific Literaturecited by 37
- 2025Pre-training under infinite computecited by 24
- 2025Signal and Noise: A Framework for Reducing Uncertainty in Language Model Evaluationcited by 22
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 9.
9 papers.
- 2026Internal Data Repetition Destroys Language Modelscited by 3
- 2026q0: Primitives for Hyper-Epoch Pretrainingcited by 1
- 2026Bridging Compute- and Data-Optimal Pretrainingcited by 1
- 2026Scaling Domain Data Repetition in LLM Pretrainingcited by 1
- 2026Data Scarcity and Model Sparsity: Mixtures-of-Experts Overfit More to Repeated Datacited by 1
- 2026When Does Generating More Help? Disentangling Fixed-Source Synthesis from Source Expansion in Synthetic Data Scalingcited by 0
- 2026Compute-Optimal Is Not Cluster-Optimal: Systems-Aware Scaling for Sparse Mixture-of-Expertscited by 0
- 2026How Model Growth, Recursion, and Boundary Operators Influence Scaling Exponentscited by 0
- 2026How Much Is an AI Token Worth? Scaling Laws for Wild AI-Generated Web Textcited by 0
- 2026How Much Is an AI Token Worth? Scaling Laws for Wild AI-Generated Web Text30 Sep 2026
- 2026How Model Growth, Recursion, and Boundary Operators Influence Scaling Exponents16 Sep 2026
- 2026Data Scarcity and Model Sparsity: Mixtures-of-Experts Overfit More to Repeated Data10 Sep 2026
- 2026Scaling Domain Data Repetition in LLM Pretraining14 Aug 2026
- 2026Compute-Optimal Is Not Cluster-Optimal: Systems-Aware Scaling for Sparse Mixture-of-Experts11 Aug 2026
- 2026Bridging Compute- and Data-Optimal Pretraining28 Jul 2026
- 2026When Does Generating More Help? Disentangling Fixed-Source Synthesis from Source Expansion in Synthetic Data Scaling2 Jul 2026
- 2026Internal Data Repetition Destroys Language Models23 Jun 2026
- 2026q0: Primitives for Hyper-Epoch Pretraining2 Jun 2026