跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.07812 · v1

Different Corpora, Different Skills? A Paired Study of Small Language Models

首次提交 2026-11-05 18:50
版本更新 2026-11-05 18:50
雷达观测 2026-11-06 11:06
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Small language models are often trained under tight data budgets, where the choice of pretraining corpus may matter as much as model size or training recipe. We compare two contrasting corpora at matched 10-million- and 37-million-word budgets: the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica and the BabyLM 2026 strict pretraining corpus. For each corpus, we train teacher models, distilled 58-million-parameter Baby-Llama students, and no-distillation student ablations, using the same model families, training recipes, and evaluation protocol across corpora. Across BLiMP, BLiMP Supplement, EWoK, Entity Tracking, and COMPS, the corpora produce different skill profiles rather than a single quality ranking. BabyLM 2026 is consistently stronger on linguistic acceptability benchmarks, while Britannica is often stronger on Entity Tracking, a synthetic state-tracking task. The contrast appears across teacher and student models and at both budgets, with the cleanest cross-seed replication in the distilled student comparison. Targeted controls show that the central contrast persists after matching training exposure and at a longer diagnostic context; direct teacher ensembling also does not reproduce the 10M Britannica student's Entity Tracking behavior. Entity Tracking magnitudes nevertheless remain sensitive to training dynamics. For this corpus pair, corpus choice can therefore produce different relative skill profiles at small scale, motivating multi-benchmark evaluation when comparing pretraining data.

作者备注:Published in the Proceedings of the Second BabyLM Workshop (EMNLP 2026). 13 pages

期刊信息:Proceedings of the Second BabyLM Workshop, pages 413-425, Budapest, Hungary, 2026

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-05 18:50 · 最新观测版本

Different Corpora, Different Skills? A Paired Study of Small Language Models

Small language models are often trained under tight data budgets, where the choice of pretraining corpus may matter as much as model size or training recipe. We compare two contrasting corpora at matched 10-million- and 37-million-word budgets: the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica and the BabyLM 2026 strict pretraining corpus. For each corpus, we train teacher models, distilled 58-million-parameter Baby-Llama students, and no-distillation student ablations, using the same model families, training recipes, and evaluation protocol across corpora. Across BLiMP, BLiMP Supplement, EWoK, Entity Tracking, and COMPS, the corpora produce different skill profiles rather than a single quality ranking. BabyLM 2026 is consistently stronger on linguistic acceptability benchmarks, while Britannica is often stronger on Entity Tracking, a synthetic state-tracking task. The contrast appears across teacher and student models and at both budgets, with the cleanest cross-seed replication in the distilled student comparison. Targeted controls show that the central contrast persists after matching training exposure and at a longer diagnostic context; direct teacher ensembling also does not reproduce the 10M Britannica student's Entity Tracking behavior. Entity Tracking magnitudes nevertheless remain sensitive to training dynamics. For this corpus pair, corpus choice can therefore produce different relative skill profiles at small scale, motivating multi-benchmark evaluation when comparing pretraining data.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗