Recent studies have put into question the belief that emergent abilities in language models are exclusive to large models. This skepticism arises from two observations: 1) smaller models can also exhibit high performance on emergent abilities and 2) there is doubt on the discontinuous metrics used to measure these abilities. In this paper, we propose to study emergent abilities in the lens of pre-training loss, instead of model size or training compute. We demonstrate that the Transformer models with the same pre-training loss, but different model and data sizes, generate the same performance on various downstream tasks, with a fixed data corpus, tokenization, and model architecture. We also discover that a model exhibits emergent abilities on certain tasks--regardless of the continuity of metrics--when its pre-training loss falls below a specific threshold. Before reaching this threshold, its performance remains at the level of random guessing. This inspires us to redefine emergent abilities as those that manifest in models with lower pre-training losses, highlighting that these abilities cannot be predicted by merely extrapolating the performance trends of models with higher pre-training losses.

In this paper, we propose to study emergent abilities in the lens of pre-training loss, instead of model size or training compute.

Empirical scaling laws have driven the evolution of large language models (LLMs), yet their coefficients shift whenever the model architecture or data pipeline changes. Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models, now standard in state-of-the-art systems, introduce a new sparsity dimension that current dense-model frontiers overlook. We investigate how MoE sparsity influences two distinct capability regimes: memorization skills and reasoning skills. By training MoE families that vary total parameters, active parameters, and top-k routing under fixed compute budgets, we disentangle pre-training loss from downstream accuracy. Our results reveal two principles. First, Active FLOPs: models with identical training loss but greater active compute achieve higher reasoning accuracy. Second, T otal tokens per parameter (TPP): memorization tasks improve with more parameters, while reasoning tasks benefit from optimal TPP, indicating that reasoning is data-hungry. Neither reinforcement learning post-training (GRPO) nor increased test-time compute alters these trends. We therefore argue that optimal MoE sparsity must be determined jointly by active FLOPs and TPP, revising the classical picture of compute-optimal scaling. The recent evolution of large language models (LLMs) has been driven by empirical scaling laws (Hestness et al., 2017) that link training loss to model size, dataset size, and compute budget. Kaplan et al. (2020) showed that these laws hold across seven orders of magnitude, establishing them as a reliable extrapolation tool for dense Transformers. Subsequent work by Hoffmann et al. (2022) demonstrated that scaling curves can be inverted to choose the compute-optimal combination of parameters and tokens for a fixed budget. Together, these results have made scaling analysis a cornerstone of model planning at both academic and industrial labs.

Recent studies have put into question the belief that emergent abilities in language models are exclusive to large models. This skepticism arises from two observations: 1) smaller models can also exhibit high performance on emergent abilities and 2) there is doubt on the discontinuous metrics used to measure these abilities. In this paper, we propose to study emergent abilities in the lens of pre-training loss, instead of model size or training compute. We demonstrate that the Transformer models with the same pre-training loss, but different model and data sizes, generate the same performance on various downstream tasks, with a fixed data corpus, tokenization, and model architecture. We also discover that a model exhibits emergent abilities on certain tasks--regardless of the continuity of metrics--when its pre-training loss falls below a specific threshold.

In Self-Supervised Learning (SSL), pre-training and evaluation are resource intensive. In the speech domain, current indicators of the quality of SSL models during pre-training, such as the loss, do not correlate well with downstream performance. Consequently, it is often difficult to gauge the final downstream performance in a cost efficient manner during pre-training. In this work, we propose unsupervised efficient methods that give insights into the quality of the pre-training of SSL speech models, namely, measuring the cluster quality and rank of the embeddings of the SSL model. Results show that measures of cluster quality and rank correlate better with downstream performance than the pre-training loss with only one hour of unlabeled audio, reducing the need for GPU hours and labeled data in SSL model evaluation.

The performance of embodied agents has been shown to improve by increasing model parameters, dataset size, and compute. This has been demonstrated in domains from robotics to video games, when generative learning objectives on offline datasets (pre-training) are used to model an agent's behavior (imitation learning) or their environment (world modeling). This paper characterizes the role of scale in these tasks more precisely. Going beyond the simple intuition that `bigger is better', we show that the same types of power laws found in language modeling also arise in world modeling and imitation learning (e.g. between loss and optimal model size). However, the coefficients of these laws are heavily influenced by the tokenizer, task \& architecture -- this has important implications on the optimal sizing of models and data.

Precise estimation of downstream performance in large language models (LLMs) prior to training is essential for guiding their development process. Scaling laws analysis utilizes the statistics of a series of significantly smaller sampling language models (LMs) to predict the performance of the target LLM. For downstream performance prediction, the critical challenge lies in the emergent abilities in LLMs that occur beyond task-specific computational thresholds. In this work, we focus on the pre-training loss as a more computation-efficient metric for performance estimation. Our two-stage approach consists of first estimating a function that maps computational resources (e.g., FLOPs) to the pre-training Loss using a series of sampling models, followed by mapping the pre-training loss to downstream task Performance after the critical "emergent phase". In preliminary experiments, this FLP solution accurately predicts the performance of LLMs with 7B and 13B parameters using a series of sampling LMs up to 3B, achieving error margins of 5% and 10%, respectively, and significantly outperforming the FLOPs-to-Performance approach. This motivates FLP-M, a fundamental approach for performance prediction that addresses the practical need to integrate datasets from multiple sources during pre-training, specifically blending general corpora with code data to accurately represent the common necessity. FLP-M extends the power law analytical function to predict domain-specific pre-training loss based on FLOPs across data sources, and employs a two-layer neural network to model the non-linear relationship between multiple domain-specific loss and downstream performance. By utilizing a 3B LLM trained on a specific ratio and a series of smaller sampling LMs, FLP-M can effectively forecast the performance of 3B and 7B LLMs across various data mixtures for most benchmarks within 10% error margins.

Recent studies have put into question the belief that emergent abilities in language models are exclusive to large models. This skepticism arises from two observations: 1) smaller models can also exhibit high performance on emergent abilities and 2) there is doubt on the discontinuous metrics used to measure these abilities. In this paper, we propose to study emergent abilities in the lens of pre-training loss, instead of model size or training compute. We demonstrate that the models with the same pre-training loss, but different model and data sizes, generate the same performance on various downstream tasks. We also discover that a model exhibits emergent abilities on certain tasks -- regardless of the continuity of metrics -- when its pre-training loss falls below a specific threshold. Before reaching this threshold, its performance remains at the level of random guessing. This inspires us to redefine emergent abilities as those that manifest in models with lower pre-training losses, highlighting that these abilities cannot be predicted by merely extrapolating the performance trends of models with higher pre-training losses.

Large language model (LLM) scaling laws are empirical formulas that estimate changes in model quality as a result of increasing parameter count and training data. However, these formulas, including the popular DeepMind Chinchilla scaling laws, neglect to include the cost of inference. We modify the Chinchilla scaling laws to calculate the optimal LLM parameter count and pre-training data size to train and deploy a model of a given quality and inference demand. We conduct our analysis both in terms of a compute budget and real-world costs and find that LLM researchers expecting reasonably large inference demand (~1B requests) should train models smaller and longer than Chinchilla-optimal.