AppleBenchmark
Mix, Don't Tune: Bilingual Pre-Training Outperforms Hyperparameter Search in Data-Constrained Settings
Summary
In data-constrained language model pre-training, two remedies exist: aggressive hyperparameter tuning such as high weight decay, and mixing in data from a high-resource auxiliary language to expand the training distribution. This study systematically compares these levers across four model scales from 150M to 1.43B parameters, using Arabic as the low-resource target and English as the auxiliary, over approximately 1000 pre-training runs. Mixing yields larger improvements than hyperparameter tuning on both validation loss and downstream task accuracy, and the gap grows with model size. Mixing boosts performance by an amount equivalent to 2–3× the unique target data on validation loss and 2–13× on downstream task accuracy, with the gain scaling steeply with model size. The authors recommend mixing in a high-resource language, prioritizing the mixing ratio over hyperparameter tuning, and transferring hyperparameters from a small proxy model via μP, noting that target-language validation loss systematically underestimates mixing’s value.
Context
Language model pre-training for low-resource languages faces data scarcity, leading to overfitting when data is repeated. Two approaches to mitigate this are hyperparameter tuning (e.g., high weight decay) and mixing in data from a high-resource auxiliary language. This study systematically compares these approaches across model scales from 150M to 1.43B parameters using Arabic as the target and English as the auxiliary.
Approach / What changed
Systematic comparison of hyperparameter tuning (high weight decay) and bilingual data mixing (Arabic target, English auxiliary) across four model scales (150M to 1.43B parameters) using approximately 1000 pre-training runs. Hyperparameters for larger models are transferred from a small proxy model via μP.
Takeaways
Mixing in data from a high-resource auxiliary language yields larger improvements than aggressive hyperparameter tuning on both validation loss and downstream task accuracy, with the gap widening as model size increases.
The performance boost from mixing is equivalent to 2–3× the unique target data on validation loss and 2–13× on downstream task accuracy, scaling steeply with model size.
Target-language validation loss systematically underestimates the value of mixing because it only captures regularization from diversified training signal, not the additional knowledge contributed by auxiliary data.
FAQ
How does mixing auxiliary data compare to hyperparameter tuning for low-resource language models?
Mixing outperforms hyperparameter tuning, with larger gains at larger model sizes. The improvement is equivalent to 2-3x more target data on validation loss and 2-13x on downstream accuracy.
Why does validation loss underestimate the benefit of mixing?
Validation loss only captures the regularization effect of diversifying the training signal, but mixing also contributes new knowledge from the auxiliary language that the repeated target corpus cannot supply.
What practical recommendations does the study offer?
Mix in a high-resource language, prioritize the mixing ratio over hyperparameter tuning, and transfer hyperparameters from a small proxy model using μP.
Source and freshness
- Source
- machinelearning.apple.com
- Published
- Added to Yomu
Summaries are generated from the original by a language model. Check the original before relying on it.
Keep reading
Related reading
The Good Stuff
Paid picks we use ourselves. Links carry a referral code — a subscription through one earns us a commission at no extra cost to you.
The best engineering reads, once a week
One useful email. Unsubscribe anytime.