mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Much Is a Dataset Worth? Scaling Laws, the Vendi Score, and Matrix Spectral Functions

arXiv 2605.29448 ↗First posted 28 May 2026cs.LG cs.AI cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural scaling laws appraise data through dataset size, while the Vendi Score uses quantum entropy to measure dataset value. We show both that common neural-scaling-law objectives and the Vendi Score are submodular. We further show that the Vendi Score is a special case of a broader class of submodular objectives that we call matrix spectral functions. This also includes determinantal (DPP) objectives, as well as many others. We also introduce weakly matrix monotone functions and show how they lead to weakly submodular matrix spectral functions, yielding a broad family of practical objectives for data appraisal. We develop secular-equation-based updates that avoid repeated eigendecompositions during greedy optimization, reducing marginal-gain evaluation for m-dimensional embeddings by an O(m) factor relative to oracle queries. This yields an average empirical speedup of about 35,000x, making direct optimization of the Vendi Score feasible on ImageNet-1K-scale datasets. Thus enabled, we compare how well several objectives predict the value of training subsets for held-out test performance under fixed-size, class-balanced, and fixed training-budget regimes, including the Vendi Score, DPPs, facility location, and three new matrix spectral variants. Across multiple datasets, facility location performs the best. Direct optimization also reveals that, while the Vendi Score is predictive over moderate score ranges, pushing the objective to higher values can make it a poor downstream performance proxy. We also find that uniformly at random fixed-size subsets, both unconstrained and class-balanced, are remarkably concentrated in both appraisal scores and held-out performance. Finally, we show that size, class balance, and training budget do not alone determine data value: even when controlling for these factors, performance ranges smoothly from good to bad.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 103 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 May 2026.

Builds on

20 of 103 references.

References · 20

  1. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
  2. 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
  3. 2017Deep Learning Scaling is Predictable, Empiricallycited by 582
  4. 2022The Vendi Score: A Diversity Evaluation Metric for Machine Learningcited by 311
  5. 2023Cerebras-GPT: Open Compute-Optimal Language Models Trained on the Cerebras Wafer-Scale Clustercited by 109
  6. 2024Resolving Discrepancies in Compute-Optimal Scaling of Language Modelscited by 88
  7. 2017One Model To Learn Them Allcited by 87
  8. 2017Practical Coreset Constructions for Machine Learningcited by 78
  9. 2025Prismatic Synthesis: Gradient-based Data Diversification Boosts Generalization in LLM Reasoningcited by 40
  10. 2024Reconciling Kaplan and Chinchilla Scaling Lawscited by 39
  11. 2022Submodularity In Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligencecited by 38
  12. 2017Depthwise Separable Convolutions for Neural Machine Translationcited by 27
8 more
  1. 2024AutoScale: Scale-Aware Data Mixing for Pre-Training LLMscited by 22
  2. 2022Private Data Valuation and Fair Payment in Data Marketplacescited by 14
  3. 2017Deep Submodular Functionscited by 12
  4. 2026A Bitter Lesson for Data Filteringcited by 8
  5. 2018Non-submodular Function Maximization subject to a Matroid Constraint, with Applicationscited by 5
  6. 2025PrivaDE: Privacy-preserving Data Evaluation for Blockchain-based Data Marketplacescited by 1
  7. 2026Vendi Novelty Scores for Out-of-Distribution Detectioncited by 1
  8. 2026Diversity You Can Actually Measure: A Fast, Model-Free Diversity Metric for Robotics Datasetscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.