From Spectra to Joint Schedules in LLM Pre-training: 3+3(+2) Scaling-Law Regimes
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Power-law learning curves are often treated as fixed properties of a model and its data, although learning-rate and batch-size schedules can change the observed loss. We study this dependence in noisy online SGD with linear random features. Conditional on the representation, an exact Volterra equation separates two response components: a forcing term that propagates unresolved target error and a memory kernel that propagates stochastic-error injections. We prove that either component follows a power law if and only if its cumulative weighted spectral mass has the corresponding low-spectrum scaling; individual eigenvalues and target coefficients need not obey coordinatewise power laws. Under a joint schedule, intrinsic time Tt=sums<tηs controls optimization progress, while rt=Bt/ηt controls noise injection. Their interaction yields sharp conditions under which a schedule preserves, changes, or destroys the clean power law, together with a memory ceiling on noise reduction. The power-law random-feature model realizes this mechanism in 3+3(+2) propagation regimes with phase-dependent compute rates. Controlled nanoGPT experiments show that (1) learning-rate and batch-size schedules with matched B/η paths are nearly equivalent in intrinsic time, (2) a forcing-memory surrogate accurately predicts loss across schedules, and (3) its fitted exponents across real-world datasets identify the regime of LLMs in 3+3(+2) map. The source code for reproducing our experiments is available on https://github.com/yichenblue/spectra-to-schedules-in-pretraining.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2026.
Builds on
14 of 52 references.
References · 14
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2024DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermismcited by 642
- 2017Deep Learning Scaling is Predictable, Empiricallycited by 582
- 2025Muon is Scalable for LLM Trainingcited by 428
- 2022A Solvable Model of Neural Scaling Lawscited by 116
- 2024A non-asymptotic theory of Kernel Ridge Regression: deterministic equivalents, test error, and GCV estimatorcited by 28
- 2024Rethinking Conventional Wisdom in Machine Learning: From Generalization to Scalingcited by 23
- 2026On the origin of neural scaling laws: from random graphs to natural languagecited by 14
- 2026A Defense of the Quadratic Modelcited by 14
- 2026Universal One-third Time Scaling in Learning Peaked Distributionscited by 10
- 2026Theory of Optimal Learning Rate Schedules and Scaling Laws for a Random Feature Modelcited by 7
- 2026Neural Scaling Universality: If Exponents Are Fixed, Time to Understand Coefficientscited by 5
2 more
- 2025Training Neural Networks at Any Scalecited by 2
- 2026Towards joint scaling laws with optimal batch size schedulescited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.