REVIEW 5 cited by
How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Training large-scale models under given resources requires careful design of parallelism strategies. In particular, the efficiency notion of critical batch size (CBS), concerning the compromise between time and compute, marks the threshold beyond which greater data parallelism leads to diminishing returns. To operationalize it, we propose a measure of CBS and pre-train a series of auto-regressive language models, ranging from 85 million to 1.2 billion parameters, on the C4 dataset. Through extensive hyper-parameter sweeps and careful control of factors such as batch size, momentum, and learning rate along with its scheduling, we systematically investigate the impact of scale on CBS. Then we fit scaling laws with respect to model and data sizes to decouple their effects. Overall, our results demonstrate that CBS scales primarily with data size rather than model size, a finding we justify theoretically through the analysis of infinite-width limits of neural networks and infinite-dimensional least squares regression. Of independent interest, we highlight the importance of common hyper-parameter choices and strategies for studying large-scale pre-training beyond fixed training durations.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Bridging Compute- and Data-Optimal Pretraining
Pretraining loss obeys a single law in which repeated or paraphrased tokens count as η(N, data-per-parameter, expansion-ratio) fresh tokens, with total effective data saturating as derived tokens grow.
-
Seesaw: Accelerating Training by Balancing Learning Rate and Batch Size Scheduling
When a cosine schedule would halve the learning rate, Seesaw cuts it by √2 and doubles the batch, matching loss curves with ~36% fewer serial steps.
-
Language Models Improve When Pretraining Data Matches Target Tasks
Ranking pretraining documents by similarity to benchmark training examples (BETR) yields consistent benchmark gains and a 2.1x compute multiplier over DCLM-Baseline.
-
Is your batch size the problem? Revisiting the Adam-SGD gap in language modeling
SGD with momentum can match Adam's performance in language modeling when trained with small batches and careful tuning, a result that contradicts several popular explanations for the optimizer gap.
-
EMA Without the Lag: Bias-Corrected Iterate Averaging Schemes
A bias-corrected exponential moving average (BEMA) is claimed to remove the lag of standard EMA weight averaging during LLM fine-tuning, improving convergence and final performance over EMA and vanilla training.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.