Host-Aware Web Crawling for LLM Pretraining Data
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Web crawling is a major source of large language model (LLM) pretraining data, yet data-selection pipelines discard a large share of crawled pages. We investigate how a crawler should allocate its budget across and within hosts to collect more high-quality pretraining data. Combining document-level quality classifier scores, web-graph centrality metrics, and Common Crawl's per-host crawl coverage, we find that roughly half of the variation in classifier scores occurs between hosts. In the crawls we analyze, a few pages from a host also provide a useful estimate of the quality of its remaining pages. Common Crawl uses harmonic centrality, a graph centrality metric, to guide its crawl allocation. In our simulations, using centrality to choose which hosts to crawl yields limited gains over random ordering and performs worse for some classifiers. For deciding how deeply to crawl each host, sampling a few pages and then fetching more from hosts with higher-scoring samples collects several times more high-quality pages per fetch than uniform depth or centrality-based allocation. Finally, Common Crawl's observed per-host coverage has little correlation with the evaluated quality signals. We estimate that tens of millions of high-quality pages remain among known but uncrawled URLs in each crawl examined, with most concentrated on a small share of hosts.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2026.
Builds on
13 of 26 references.
References · 13
- 2024The FineWeb Datasets: Decanting the Web for the Finest Text Data at Scalecited by 1,160
- 2016Bag of Tricks for Efficient Text Classificationcited by 876
- 2024A Survey on Data Selection for Language Modelscited by 236
- 2022LinkBERT: Pretraining Language Models with Document Linkscited by 211
- 2025FineWeb2: One Pipeline to Scale Them All -- Adapting Pre-Training Data Processing to Every Languagecited by 143
- 2022Whose Language Counts as High Quality? Measuring Language Ideologies in Text Data Selectioncited by 53
- 2025Enhancing Multilingual LLM Pretraining with Model-Based Data Selectioncited by 35
- 2024AboutMe: Using Self-Descriptions in Webpages to Document the Effects of English Pretraining Data Filterscited by 22
- 2022ClueWeb22: 10 Billion Web Documents with Visual and Semantic Informationcited by 20
- 2013Axioms for Centralitycited by 16
- 2025Judging Quality Across Languages: A Multilingual Approach to Pretraining Data Filtering with Language Modelscited by 7
- 2026Hubs or Fringes: Pretraining Data Selection via Web Graph Centralitycited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.