Skip to content

Downstream results: extra seeds, single-epoch check, appendix tables - #9

Merged
sanderland merged 1 commit into
sanderland:claude/fineweb-space-neighbors-k10ufwfrom
cimeister:claude/downstream-results
Aug 2, 2026
Merged

Downstream results: extra seeds, single-epoch check, appendix tables#9
sanderland merged 1 commit into
sanderland:claude/fineweb-space-neighbors-k10ufwfrom
cimeister:claude/downstream-results

Conversation

@cimeister

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Ports the remaining downstream work onto the current layout. The round-3 numbers were already here; these are the additions.

Do more seeds change it? No.

bnd_wpd at 8 shards, seeds 0-5 instead of 0-2:

n mean bpb/byte sd
3 0.879999 0.000487
6 0.879932 0.000673

The mean moves 0.10 standard deviations. The sd grows, so three seeds was mildly optimistic about spread, but 0.00067 is still an order of magnitude below the 0.0053 difference against plain. The appendix table states this as the justification for reporting the other arms at three seeds.

Does it survive single-epoch training? Yes.

At 8 shards every arm makes 3.4 to 3.6 passes over the same 2 GB, which suppresses the mechanism better compression is meant to exploit. plain and bnd_wpd were rerun at 32 shards, in their own NANOCHAT_BASE and OUT so the 8-shard setup was not altered (the loader uses every shard except the last, so adding shards to the shared directory would silently change what an 8-shard run trains on).

arm 8 shards 32 shards
plain 0.8853 0.8488
bnd_wpd 0.8800 0.8439
difference +0.00532 +0.00497

Both arms gain about 0.036 from four times the unique text, and the gap is unchanged, a 6% reduction well inside the seed spread. The single-epoch comparison is tighter (t = 27.3 against 16.7), since seed variance shrinks when nothing is repeated.

One bug

collect_results.py's tag regex did not allow a variant suffix, so every plain_bpe_d12_s0_n32 style run parsed as its own single-run arm rather than grouping into plain and bnd_wpd. Caught because the summary printed six one-run arms instead of two. The suffix is optional now and recorded in a variant column.

Also

  • make_tex_tables.py writes downstream_appendix.tex beside the main tables. Both appendix tables are generated from the TSVs; no number is typed.
  • Carries downstream_section.tex and downstream_limitations.tex, which had no home left after the old acl_latex.tex was dropped. Paths adjusted to this layout.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…ndix tables

Ports what was left on the results branch onto this layout. The round-3 numbers are
already here; these are the additions.

Extra seeds. bnd_wpd at 8 shards now has seeds 0-5 rather than 0-2. The mean moves
from 0.879999 to 0.879932, a shift of 0.10 standard deviations, and the standard
deviation grows from 0.00049 to 0.00067, still an order of magnitude below the
0.0053 difference against plain. Three seeds is enough, and the appendix table says
so as the justification for reporting the other arms at three.

Single-epoch check. At 8 shards every arm makes 3.4 to 3.6 passes over the same
2 GB, which suppresses the mechanism better compression is supposed to exploit, so
plain and bnd_wpd were rerun at 32 shards in their own NANOCHAT_BASE and OUT. Both
improve by about 0.036 with four times the unique text, and the difference between
them is unchanged: +0.00532 to +0.00497. results_n32.tsv.

collect_results.py: the tag regex did not allow a variant suffix, so every
plain_bpe_d12_s0_n32 style run parsed as its own single-run arm instead of grouping.
The suffix is now optional and recorded in a `variant` column.

make_tex_tables.py writes downstream_appendix.tex alongside the main tables, both
generated from the TSVs rather than typed.

Also carries the section prose and the limitations paragraph, which had no home left
after the old acl_latex.tex was dropped.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@sanderland
sanderland merged commit 162a019 into sanderland:claude/fineweb-space-neighbors-k10ufw Aug 2, 2026
1 check passed
@cimeister cimeister mentioned this pull request Aug 3, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants