Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.31867

Rewriting Scaling Laws for Synthetic Data with Compute and Data Constraints

Nicholas Roberts·Ahmed Ahmed·Suhas Kotha·Percy Liang·Yu Wang·Alex Renda·Nitya Mani
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Synthetic rewrites, where a language model rewrites a natural document e.g. into a target style, are now a standard ingredient of pretraining corpora. However, critical aspects of their use remain poorly understood, such as how much compute should be spent rewriting training data and whether a model trained on rewrites can outperform the rewriter. We study these two questions by proposing a rewriting scaling law that predicts loss from model size, training tokens, the fraction of training tokens that are rewrites, and the number of epochs over the natural data, charging the compute spent generating rewrites. We fit this scaling law in two settings. In the compute-limited setting, natural data is plentiful and rewrites come from a third-party rewriter trained with more compute than our largest run. We find that the estimated optimal rewrite fraction increases with compute, from under $10\%$ at $3\times10^{18}$ FLOPs to $32\%$ at $10^{22}$ FLOPs. Our scaling forecast extrapolates $33\times$ in FLOPs to train a 22B-parameter model, whose final loss is within $1.1\%$ of our prediction. This model achieves a better BPB than its rewriter on several web domains at one-tenth the rewriter's training compute. In the data-limited setting, we assume we only have a fixed seed set of natural data and that our rewriter is a model of the same size as the target, pretrained on that seed set. Again, we find the optimal rewrite fraction increases with the compute budget. We also demonstrate that a model trained on rewrites of its own pretraining data, generated by a rewriter of the same size, beats the best run on natural data alone at every model size up to 3B. Our results show that synthetic rewriting can be studied through the scaling law lens: that optimal methodological choices are predictable and scaling does not necessarily break down beyond the rewriter's capabilities.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGcs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Nicholas Roberts, Ahmed Ahmed, Suhas Kotha, Percy Liang, Yu Wang, Alex Renda, Nitya Mani. 2026-10-22. Rewriting Scaling Laws for Synthetic Data with Compute and Data Constraints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.31867

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Best-of-Majority: Minimax-Optimal Strategy for Pass@$k$ Inference Scaling

LLM inference often generates a batch of candidates for a prompt and selects one via strategies like majority voting or Best-of- N (BoN). For difficult tasks, this single-shot selection often underperforms. Consequently, evaluations commonly report Pass@$k$: the agent may submit up to $k$ responses, and only the best of them is used when computing regret. Motivated by this, we study inference scaling in the more general Pass@$k$ inference setting, and prove that neither majority voting nor BoN exhibits the desirable scaling with $k$ and the sampling budget $N$. Combining the advantages of majority voting and BoN, we propose a new inference strategy called Best-of-Majority (BoM), with a pivotal step that restricts the candidates to the responses with high frequency in the $N$ samples before selecting the top-$k$ rewards. We prove that when the sampling budget is $N=\tildeΩ(C^*)$, the regret of BoM is $O(ε_{\mathrm{opt}}+\sqrt{ε_{\mathrm{RM}}^2C^*/k})$, where $C^*$ is the coverage coefficient, $ε_{\mathrm{RM}}$ is the estimation error of the reward model, and $ε_{\mathrm{opt}}$ is the estimation error of reward at the optimal response. We further establish a matching lower bound, certifying that our algorithm is minimax optimal. Beyond optimality, BoM has a key advantage: unlike majority voting and BoN, its performance does not degrade when increasing $N$. Experimental results of inference on math problems show BoM outperforming both majority voting and BoN.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

PepEVOLVE: Position-Aware Dynamic Peptide Optimization via Group-Relative Advantage

Macrocyclic peptides are an emerging modality that combines biologics-like affinity with small-molecule-like developability, yet their vast combinatorial space and multi-parameter objectives make lead optimization slow and challenging. Prior generative approaches for peptide lead optimization (e.g., PepINVENT) require chemists to pre-specify mutable positions for optimization, choices that are not always known a priori, and rely on static pretraining and optimization algorithms that limit the model's ability to generalize and effectively optimize peptide sequences. We introduce PepEVOLVE, a position-aware, dynamic framework that learns both where to edit and how to dynamically optimize peptides for multi-parameter improvement. PepEVOLVE (i) augments pretraining with dynamic masking and CHUCKLES shifting to improve generalization, (ii) uses a context-free multi-armed-bandit router that discovers high-reward residues, and (iii) couples a novel evolving optimization algorithm with group-relative advantage to stabilize reinforcement updates. During in silico evaluations, the router policy reliably learns and concentrates probability on chemically tractable sites that influence the desired peptide's properties. On a therapeutically motivated Rev-binding macrocycle benchmark, PepEVOLVE outperformed PepINVENT by reaching higher averaged permeability-weighted optimization scores of approximately 0.8 vs. 0.6, achieving best candidates with score of 0.97 (vs. 0.89), and converging in fewer steps under the task of optimizing permeability and lipophilicity with structure constraints. Overall, PepEVOLVE offers a practical, reproducible path to linear and macrocyclic peptide lead optimization when optimal edit sites are unknown, enabling more efficient chemical space exploration and improving design quality across multiple objectives to accelerate the design cycles.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Beyond the Dirac Delta: Mitigating Diversity Collapse in Reinforcement Fine-Tuning for Versatile Image Generation

Reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a paradigm for fine-tuning large-scale generative models, such as diffusion and flow models, to align with complex human preferences and user-specified tasks. A fundamental limitation remains \textit{the curse of diversity collapse}, where the objective formulation and optimization landscape inherently collapse the policy to a Dirac delta distribution. To address this challenge, we propose \textbf{DRIFT} (\textbf{D}ive\textbf{R}sity-\textbf{I}ncentivized Reinforcement \textbf{F}ine-\textbf{T}uning for Versatile Image Generation), an innovative framework that systematically incentivizes output diversity throughout the on-policy fine-tuning process, reconciling strong task alignment with high generation diversity to enhance versatility essential for applications that demand diverse candidate generations. We approach the problem across three representative perspectives: i) \textbf{sampling} a reward-concentrated subset that filters out reward outliers to prevent premature collapse; ii) \textbf{prompting} with stochastic variations to expand the conditioning space, and iii) \textbf{optimization} of the intra-group diversity with a potential-based reward shaping mechanism. Experimental results show that DRIFT exhibits clear Pareto dominance in task alignment and generation diversity, achieving 3.88\%$\sim$81.42\% higher diversity at matched alignment and 14.38\%$\sim$56.45\% higher alignment at matched diversity. Our code is available at \textcolor{magenta}{\href{https://github.com/NJU-RL/DRIFT}{https://github.com/NJU-RL/DRIFT}}.

cs.LG↗