Knowledge Acquisition During Pre-training? Large Language Models Learn Better With Auxiliary Views
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Gaps remain in our understanding of how large language models (LLMs) acquire knowledge during pre-training. We posit that auxiliary views, reformulations of knowledge, are causally helpful for learning. We design controlled experiments to isolate this. First, we confirm that repetition is necessary for acquisition and clarify that paraphrasing helps only at smaller batch sizes. Second, holding the token budget fixed, allocating tokens from document repetition to auxiliary views improves learning, counterintuitively, even for factual recall. Third, the effectiveness of auxiliary views is not contingent on the strength of the teacher model that generates them. Fourth, we identify forms of knowledge, contextual and foundational, that aid learning in the presence of prior knowledge gaps. Finally, we examine how these effects manifest mechanistically via layer-wise biases and compression. Together, our findings suggest that auxiliary representations of knowledge, which arise naturally in large pre-training corpora, are a key factor in the success of pre-training and offer a plausible explanation for why data diversity matters.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Sep 2026.
Builds on
24 of 48 references.
References · 24
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,936
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2019How Can We Know What Language Models Know?cited by 959
- 2022Galactica: A Large Language Model for Sciencecited by 744
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 714
- 2024DataComp-LM: In search of the next generation of training sets for language modelscited by 398
- 2023Physics of Language Models: Part 3.1, Knowledge Storage and Extractioncited by 270
- 2024Does Fine-Tuning LLMs on New Knowledge Encourage Hallucinations?cited by 232
- 2023A Pretrainer's Guide to Training Data: Measuring the Effects of Data Age, Domain Coverage, Quality, & Toxicitycited by 182
12 more
- 2023Fine-Tuning or Retrieval? Comparing Knowledge Injection in LLMscited by 178
- 2021Towards Continual Knowledge Learning of Language Modelscited by 174
- 2024Infini-gram: Scaling Unbounded n-gram Language Models to a Trillion Tokenscited by 153
- 2022Scaling Laws and Interpretability of Learning from Repeated Datacited by 152
- 2024SaulLM-7B: A pioneering Large Language Model for Lawcited by 142
- 2023To Repeat or Not To Repeat: Insights from Scaling LLM under Token-Crisiscited by 92
- 2024Reuse, Don't Retrain: A Recipe for Continued Pretraining of Language Modelscited by 72
- 2021Can Generative Pre-trained Language Models Serve as Knowledge Bases for Closed-book QA?cited by 62
- 2024Instruction-tuned Language Models are Better Knowledge Learnerscited by 55
- 2023Meta-Learning Online Adaptation of Language Modelscited by 43
- 2025TxGemma: Efficient and Agentic LLMs for Therapeuticscited by 41
- 2025Towards Objective Fine-tuning: How LLMs' Prior Knowledge Causes Potential Poor Calibration?cited by 11
Built on by
Not cited yet.