Scaling Repeated-Data Pretraining: Batch Size, Regularization, and GPU-Time Tradeoffs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study pretraining when compute is abundant but unique training data are finite, requiring repeated training on the same data. We first revisit infinite-compute pretraining (Kim et al. 2026) and show that its frontier depends critically on choices previously fixed or studied only in isolation. In particular, optimizing batch size together with epoch counts reveals a U-shaped relationship between validation loss and batch size, favoring smaller batches than typical pretraining, likely because small-batch gradient noise provides implicit regularization. We further find that training recipes, previously optimized under a single-pass assumption, can be tuned, e.g., repacking documents into new sequences every epoch, weight tying, and positive embedding weight decay. We then relax the infinite-compute assumption. In particular, smaller-than-typical batch sizes can require prohibitively long sequential training, motivating to treat GPUs and time as separate resources. Tighter deadlines favor larger batches, and latency-oriented parallelism can trade additional GPUs for shorter training. Nevertheless, even under a fixed time budget, a smaller batch with fewer GPUs can achieve lower validation loss than a larger batch with more GPUs, challenging the common practice of increasing data parallelism to maximize GPU utilization under a deadline. Together, our results identify underexplored factors in repeated-data training and provide concrete guidance on how training recipes and resource allocation should change from single-pass pretraining.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Oct 2026.
Builds on
32 of 42 references.
References · 32
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,886
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
- 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,883
- 2018Can a Suit of Armor Conduct Electricity? A New Dataset for Open Book Question Answeringcited by 2,164
- 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,822
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
- 2016On Large-Batch Training for Deep Learning: Generalization Gap and Sharp Minimacited by 1,352
- 2024MiniCPM: Unveiling the Potential of Small Language Models with Scalable Training Strategiescited by 723
- 2024DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermismcited by 642
- 2024OLMo: Accelerating the Science of Language Modelscited by 613
20 more
- 2018Local SGD Converges Fast and Communicates Littlecited by 605
- 2023Scaling Data-Constrained Language Modelscited by 403
- 2024DataComp-LM: In search of the next generation of training sets for language modelscited by 398
- 2018An Empirical Model of Large-Batch Trainingcited by 281
- 2016Using the Output Embedding to Improve Language Modelscited by 272
- 2022Branch-Train-Merge: Embarrassingly Parallel Training of Expert Language Modelscited by 191
- 2023DiLoCo: Distributed Low-Communication Training of Language Modelscited by 121
- 2024Language models scale reliably with over-training and on downstream taskscited by 113
- 2023Cerebras-GPT: Open Compute-Optimal Language Models Trained on the Cerebras Wafer-Scale Clustercited by 109
- 2023To Repeat or Not To Repeat: Insights from Scaling LLM under Token-Crisiscited by 92
- 2020On the Generalization Benefit of Noise in Stochastic Gradient Descentcited by 82
- 2024How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training?cited by 73
- 2024Establishing Task Scaling Laws via Compute-Efficient Model Ladderscited by 35
- 2025Pre-training under infinite computecited by 29
- 2025Signal and Noise: A Framework for Reducing Uncertainty in Language Model Evaluationcited by 26
- 2025Critical Batch Size Revisited: A Simple Empirical Approach to Large-Batch Language Model Trainingcited by 23
- 2024Scaling Law for Language Models Training Considering Batch Sizecited by 22
- 2025Datasets, Documents, and Repetitions: The Practicalities of Unequal Data Qualitycited by 8
- 2026EMO: Pretraining Mixture of Experts for Emergent Modularitycited by 4
- 2026Data-Constrained Language Model Pretraining: Improved Regularization and Scaling Lawscited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.