HackerPapers

arXiv:2608.14071cs.AI

Scaling Domain Data Repetition in LLM Pretraining

Jingwei Li, Xinran Gu, Rui Dai, Xintong Hao, Chengyin Xu, Yan Wu, Shuran Zheng, Jingzhao Zhang

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

As large language models scale, their training-token budgets must also increase to maintain an appropriate tokens-per-parameter ratio (\(\mathrm{TPP}\)). However, high-quality domain data is much harder to scale than general web data. As model size and the training-token budget increase, its fraction in the training mixture tends to decrease. Repeating the available high-quality data provides an effective way to counteract this dilution, but excessive repetition may lead to overfitting. We study this trade-off under practical LLM scaling, where the training-token budget grows proportionally with model size. For a fixed domain, we first find that, surprisingly at a fixed \(\mathrm{TPP}\), the optimal repetition count mildly increases with model size. Across different domains, we find that the optimal repetition count is strongly negatively correlated with the final validation loss of a domain: domains with lower loss can generally benefit from more repetitions. In contrast, the amount of unique domain data is only weakly related to the optimal repetition count. These findings suggest that repetition counts tuned on smaller proxy models with the same \(\mathrm{TPP}\) can provide a practical estimate for larger models.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.AIArtificial Intelligence

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 1 HN submission from Aug 2026 to Aug 2026. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.