<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Beyond Chinchilla-Optimal: Accounting for Inference in Language Model Scaling Laws · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2401.00448/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2401.00448/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Beyond Chinchilla-Optimal: Accounting for Inference in Language Model Scaling Laws — mentioned by ijk</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40079873</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2401.00448:40079873</guid><pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:30:40 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Quite. The big question at the time was &amp;quot;how much data do we need to train GPT-3 equivalent models&amp;quot;. Open models had failed to live up to GPT performance, even ones with a massive number of parameters. So getting results that suggested a reason why other models were massively undertrained was important. Meanwhile, people noticed that for deployed models, inference cost often outweighs the initial training costs. It&amp;#x27;s sometimes better to train a smaller, faster model longer on more data, because it has lower overall cost (including environmental impact) if you&amp;#x27;re expecting to run the model a…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2401.00448/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.LG</category></item></channel></rss>
