The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models
Open accessAbstract
We investigate the optimal model size and number of tokens for training a transformer language model under a given compute budget. We find that current large language models are significantly undertrained, a consequence of the recent focus on scaling language models whilst keeping the amount of training data constant. By training over 400 language models ranging from 70 million to over 16 billion parameters on 5 to 500 billion tokens, we find that for compute-optimal training, the model size and the number of training tokens should be scaled equally: for every doubling of model size the number of training tokens should also be doubled. We test this hypothesis by training a predicted compute-optimal model, Chinchilla, that uses the same compute budget as Gopher but with 70B parameters and 4$\times$ more more data. Chinchilla uniformly and significantly outperforms Gopher (280B), GPT-3 (175B), Jurassic-1 (178B), and Megatron-Turing NLG (530B) on a large range of downstream evaluation tasks. This also means that Chinchilla uses substantially less compute for fine-tuning and inference, greatly facilitating downstream usage. As a highlight, Chinchilla reaches a state-of-the-art average accuracy of 67.5% on the MMLU benchmark, greater than a 7% improvement over Gopher.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, whereas recent advances in modeling and hardware have increased the data training capacity of LLMs, increasing from Wikipedia-scale corpora to close to three orders of magnitude more”
From Data Governance in the Age of Large-Scale Data-Driven Language Technology (2022) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. [71]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The costs required to create such models (and continuing returns to scale) means that only well-resourced actors can create cuttingedge models (Epoch, 2023; Hoffmann et al., 2022; Kaplan et al., 2020), making them relatively few in number.”
From Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AI (2025) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Despite containing 405B parameters, our largest Llama 3 in fact contains fewer parameters than earlier and much less performant models such as PALM (Chowdhery et al., 2023), due to better understanding of scaling laws (Kaplan et al., 2020; Hoffmann et al., 2022).”
From The Llama 3 Herd of Models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Given that deep learning AI and LLMs AI models exhibit similar power scaling laws, our focus can be directed specifically towards LLMs AI without a significant loss of generality.”
From Large language models at work in China’s labor market (2025) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Prior work (Kaplan et al., 2020;Hoffmann et al., 2022) assumes that the necessary data to support scaling is unlimited.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For 100M tokens, the corresponding one-epoch compute-optimal model according to scaling laws from (Hoffmann et al., 2022) has U N of approximately 7M parameters (see §C for the scaling coefficients we use).”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This is very close to the 73 billion parameters and 1.3 trillion tokens predicted by the IsoFLOP curves on C4 from (Hoffmann et al., 2022)”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Based on their IsoFLOP training runs on C4, they only provide the information that for C4, compute (C) allocated to data (D) and parameters (N ) should be scaled exactly equally for optimality, i.e. a = b = 0.5”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“the precise ratios vary considerably across data sets and approaches.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For example given the Gopher (Rae et al., 2021) compute budget of 5.76 × 10 23 FLOPs, their parametric loss function fitted on MassiveWeb predicts an optimal allocation of 40 billion parameters.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Meanwhile, if the training data set is C4 (Raffel et al., 2020) their IsoFLOP approach predicts 73 billion parameters to be optimal, almost twice as much.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The creators of Galactica decided to train a 120 billion parameter model on 450 billion tokens, a significant overallocation to parameters even in Chinchilla terms (black efficient frontier).”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Meanwhile, the default Chinchilla scaling law (Hoffmann et al., 2022) predicts loss to continue decreasing as parameters are added, which is in stark contrast to the empirical data.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In many cases, the effect of scale on performance can often be methodologically predicted via scaling laws-for example, scaling curves for cross-entropy loss have been shown to empirically span more than seven orders of magnitude (Kaplan et al., 2020; Hoffmann et al., 2022).”
From Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models (2022) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For GPT-3, Gopher, and Chinchilla, models of ∼ 10 22 training FLOPs ( ∼ 10B parameters) or smaller do not perform better than guessing on average over all the topics, scaling up to 3-5 · 10 23 training FLOPs (70B-280B parameters) enables performance to substantially surpass random.”
From Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models (2022) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Hoffmann et al.'s estimated model L(N, D) = 1.6934 + 406.4 N 0.3392 + 410.7 D 0.2849”
From Chinchilla Scaling: A replication attempt (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The scaling law from which our model is derived applies to dense transformers following a GPT-3 architecture (Hoffmann et al. 2022; Rae et al. 2021).”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We conducted our study using Chinchilla 70B because it outperformed other LLMs on a large collection of language tasks [50].”
From Co-Writing Screenplays and Theatre Scripts with Language Models: Evaluation by Industry Professionals (2023) · cites this paper as [50]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While AI systems focus on scaling neural, data, and computation capacity (30, 31, 74–77), our findings suggest that evolution of embodied intelligent behavior (biological or artificial) may require coordinated scaling of visual acuity and processing.”
From What if eye...? Computationally recreating vision evolution (2025) · cites this paper as [74]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Recent investigations on large language models have profiled the trade-off between model size and data volume when the compute budget is fixed42, suggesting model size is another important dimension for pre-training worthy of further investigation for human sensing data.”
From Self-supervised learning for human activity recognition using 700,000 person-days of wearable data (2024) · cites this paper as [42]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The capacity and capability of LLMs greatly increased with scale, taking the same path that nature took by evolving bigger and better brains (Allman, 1999; Hoffmann et al., 2022).”
From Large Language Models and the Reverse Turing Test (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“recent work has put a strong emphasis on the quantity of data being a strong factor in a trained model's performance on evaluation tasks (Kaplan et al., 2020; Hoffmann et al., 2022)”
From The BigScience ROOTS Corpus: A 1.6TB Composite Multilingual Dataset (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Scaling laws revealed predictable relationships between parameter count, data volume, and loss, reinforcing the intuition that progress tracked directly with model size [Kaplan et al., 2020, Hoffmann et al., 2022].”
From Externalization in LLM Agents: A Unified Review of Memory, Skills, Protocols and Harness Engineering (2026) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The impact of scaling is illustrated by the scaling laws [34, 35], which numerically uncover the power-law relationship between model size, data volume, training scale and the growth of the model's performance.”
From When large language models meet personalization: perspectives of challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as [35]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“With increased model size, given adequate data and computational resources, proficiency in word prediction within textual contexts, as demonstrated by the training dataset, is enhanced (Kaplan et al. 2020; Ganguli et al. 2022; Hoffmann et al. 2022).”
From Large language models (LLMs): survey, technical frameworks, and future challenges (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Hoffmann et al. [24] models the improvement for larger model training budgets as a power function, proportional to the model parameters N and training tokens D , with the exact functional form and prediction setup varying between work [44].”
From Signal and Noise: A Framework for Reducing Uncertainty in Language Model Evaluation (2025) · cites this paper as [24]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Notably, the 70-billion parameter Chinchilla model (Hoffmann et al., 2022) outperforms the 280-billion parameter Gopher model (Rae et al., 2021) while using a similar compute budget by being trained on four times more data.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Allocation is balanced: resources are divided roughly equally between scaling of parameters and data (Hoffmann et al., 2022).”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These methods lead to the conclusion that α ≈ β and hence N and D should be scaled proportionally for compute-optimal training.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“While Hoffmann et al. (2022) have shown that the equal scaling of model parameters and training tokens holds across different training data sets”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, for C4, which is our training data set, they do not provide the coefficients necessary to compute loss with their parametric loss function.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Results from (Hoffmann et al., 2022) show that there are differences in the scaling coefficients when training on C4 as compared to GitHub code, however, the overall allocation trend is the same.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We find the parameter counts reported in Chinchilla (Hoffmann et al., 2022) to be significantly different than our calculations, especially at larger scales.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“they report a confidence intervals of 0.454 to 0.455 and 0.542 to 0.543 for a and b respectively.”
From Chinchilla Scaling: A replication attempt (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Hoffmann et al. (2022) propose three methods for estimating a compute-optimal scaling law.”
From Chinchilla Scaling: A replication attempt (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. (2022)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The starting point is the scaling law from Hoffmann et al. 2022, which relates the training loss L of a dense transformer to its number of parameters N and the training dataset size D :”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“given that that the physical compute is approximately given by C ≈ 6 ND (Hoffmann et al. 2022; Kaplan et al. 2020)”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“By directly applying the new scaling law, we calculate it provides a 2 × to 4 × reduction in compute needed to reach a given loss target at the scale of current frontier LLMs, depending on the scale of the model (see Appendix B).”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The rapid scaling of compute for training language models (Sevilla et al. 2022), coupled with insights from scaling laws (Hoffmann et al. 2022; Kaplan et al. 2020), suggests that a substantial portion of the improvement in language model capabilities can be attributed to the increased use of computational resources.”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This is in spite of the estimate by Hoffmann et al. 2022 that N/D should be O (1) for compute-optimal training.”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“we have the approximate relation that C ≈ 6 ND (Hoffmann et al. 2022).”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Notably, GPT-3 and Chinchilla fail to achieve one-shot performance of better than random, even when scaled to their largest model size of ∼ 5 · 10 23 FLOPs.”
From Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models (2022) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In comparison, Kaplan et al. 2020 find a scaling exponent of around -0.048, and Hoffmann et al. 2022 estimate values of around -0.3.”
From Algorithmic progress in language models (2024) · cites this paper as Hoffmann et al. 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
This paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledge
Singhal, K., Azizi, S., Tu, T., Mahdavi, S. S., Wei, J., Chung, H. W., Scales, N., Tanwani, A., Cole-Lewis, H., Pfohl, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.13138 · Cited by 4,083
Large language models encode clinical knowledge
Singhal, K., Azizi, S., Tu, T., Mahdavi, S. S., Wei, J., Chung, H. W., Scales, N., Tanwani, A., Cole-Lewis, H., Pfohl, S., et al. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06291-2 · Cited by 4,083
PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways
Chowdhery, A., Narang, S., Devlin, J., Bosma, M., Mishra, G., Roberts, A., Barham, P., Chung, H. W., Sutton, C., Gehrmann, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2204.02311 · Cited by 2,590
“, 2021), Chinchilla (Hoffmann et al., 2022), Megatron–Turing NLG (Smith et al.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialEmergent Abilities of Large Language Models
Wei, J., Tay, Y., Bommasani, R., Raffel, C., Zoph, B., Borgeaud, S., Yogatama, D., Bosma, M., Zhou, D., Metzler, D., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2206.07682 · Cited by 1,264
Self-citationDINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervision
Oquab, M., Darcet, T., Moutakanni, T., Vo, H., Szafraniec, M., Khalidov, V., Fernandez, P., Haziza, D., Massa, F., El-Nouby, A., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.07193 · Cited by 1,078
“Learning task-agnostic pretrained representations have become the standard in Natural Language Processing (NLP) (Radford et al., 2019; Raffel et al., 2020; Chowdhery et al., 2022; Hoffmann et al., 2022; Touvron et al., 2023).”
BackgroundAutonomous chemical research with large language models
Boiko, D. A., MacKnight, R., Kline, B., & Gomes, G. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06792-0 · Cited by 1,050
Toward expert-level medical question answering with large language models
Singhal, K., Tu, T., Gottweis, J., Sayres, R., Wulczyn, E., Amin, M., Hou, L., Clark, K., Pfohl, S. R., Cole-Lewis, H., et al. (2025) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03423-7 · Cited by 1,734
Taxonomy of Risks posed by Language Models
Weidinger, L., Uesato, J., Rauh, M., Griffin, C., Huang, P.-S., Mellor, J., Glaese, A., Cheng, M., Balle, B., Kasirzadeh, A., et al. (2022) · 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3531146.3533088 · Cited by 764
“Recent advancements in LM research [30, 38, 75, 170, 205] are rooted in the capacity to increase LM size in terms of number of”
BackgroundSelf-citationNucleotide Transformer: building and evaluating robust foundation models for human genomics
Dalla-Torre, H., Gonzalez, L., Mendoza-Revilla, J., Lopez Carranza, N., Grzywaczewski, A. H., Oteri, F., Dallago, C., Trop, E., de Almeida, B. P., Sirelkhatim, H., et al. (2025) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-024-02523-z · Cited by 772
“We extended the training duration of the 250M-and 500M-parameter models to encompass 1 trillion tokens, aligning with recent recommendations in the literature 45 (Fig.”
Reproducible Scaling Laws for Contrastive Language-Image Learning
Cherti, M., Beaumont, R., Wightman, R., Wortsman, M., Ilharco, G., Gordon, C., Schuhmann, C., Schmidt, L., & Jitsev, J. (2023) · 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.00276 · Cited by 673
Sequence modeling and design from molecular to genome scale with Evo
Nguyen, E., Poli, M., Durrant, M. G., Kang, B., Katrekar, D., Li, D. B., Bartie, L. J., Thomas, A. W., King, S. H., Brixi, G., et al. (2024) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.ado9336 · Cited by 580
Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models
Srivastava, A., Rastogi, A., Rao, A., Shoeb, A. A. M., Abid, A., Fisch, A., Brown, A. R., Santoro, A., Gupta, A., Garriga-Alonso, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2206.04615 · Cited by 569
Can Large Language Models Transform Computational Social Science?
Ziems, C., Held, W., Shaikh, O., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., & Yang, D. (2024) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00502 · Cited by 585
C-Pack: Packed Resources For General Chinese Embeddings
Xiao, S., Liu, Z., Zhang, P., Muennighoff, N., Lian, D., & Nie, J.-Y. (2024) · Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3626772.3657878 · Cited by 523
ProGen2: Exploring the boundaries of protein language models
Nijkamp, E., Ruffolo, J. A., Weinstein, E. N., Naik, N., & Madani, A. (2023) · Cell Systems · doi:10.1016/j.cels.2023.10.002 · Cited by 480
Almanac — Retrieval-Augmented Language Models for Clinical Medicine
Zakka, C., Shad, R., Chaurasia, A., Dalal, A. R., Kim, J. L., Moor, M., Fong, R., Phillips, C., Alexander, K., Ashley, E., et al. (2024) · NEJM AI · doi:10.1056/aioa2300068 · Cited by 424
Large language models (LLMs): survey, technical frameworks, and future challenges
Kumar, P. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10888-y · Cited by 395
When large language models meet personalization: perspectives of challenges and opportunities
Chen, J., Liu, Z., Huang, X., Wu, C., Liu, Q., Jiang, G., Pu, Y., Lei, Y., Chen, X., Wang, X., et al. (2024) · World Wide Web · doi:10.1007/s11280-024-01276-1 · Cited by 367
Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learning
Sevilla, J., Heim, L., Ho, A., Besiroglu, T., Hobbhahn, M., & Villalobos, P. (2022) · 2022 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn55064.2022.9891914 · Cited by 363
“The study of scaling laws [3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13] relate these compute trends to model performance, and are actively used by large corporations to inform their training resource requirements [2, 14].”
BackgroundMethodA Survey of GPT-3 Family Large Language Models Including ChatGPT and GPT-4
Kalyan, K. S. (2024) · Natural Language Processing Journal · doi:10.1016/j.nlp.2023.100048 · Cited by 335
Hsieh, C.-Y., Li, C.-L., Yeh, C.-K., Nakhost, H., Fujii, Y., Ratner, A., Krishna, R., Lee, C.-Y., & Pfister, T. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.507 · Cited by 316
Can large language models reason about medical questions?
Liévin, V., Hother, C. E., Motzfeldt, A. G., & Winther, O. (2024) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.100943 · Cited by 343
“Large Language Models (LLMs) In recent years, tremendous resources have been allocated to scale Transformer-based language models (Brown et al., 2020; Rae et al., 2021; Chowdhery et al., 2022; Thoppilan et al., 2022; Hoffmann et al., 2022; Smith et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2022; Lieber et al., 2021; Fedus et al., 2021…”
BackgroundGenerative AI for economic research: use cases and implications for economists
Korinek, A. (2023) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.20231736 · Cited by 293
xLSTM: Extended Long Short-Term Memory
Beck, M., Pöppel, K., Spanring, M., Auer, A., Prudnikova, O., Kopp, M., Klambauer, G., Brandstetter, J., & Hochreiter, S. (2024) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 · doi:10.52202/079017-3417 · Cited by 286
Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them
Suzgun, M., Scales, N., Schärli, N., Gehrmann, S., Tay, Y., Chung, H. W., Chowdhery, A., Le, Q., Chi, E., Zhou, D., et al. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.824 · Cited by 253
Mirowski, P., Mathewson, K. W., Pittman, J., & Evans, R. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581225 · Cited by 240
MM-LLMs: Recent Advances in MultiModal Large Language Models
Zhang, D., Yu, Y., Dong, J., Li, C., Su, D., Chu, C., & Yu, D. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.738 · Cited by 260
Jablonka, K. M., Ai, Q., Al-Feghali, A., Badhwar, S., Bocarsly, J. D., Bran, A. M., Bringuier, S., Brinson, L. C., Choudhary, K., Circi, D., et al. (2023) · Digital Discovery · doi:10.1039/d3dd00113j · Cited by 218
AI generates covertly racist decisions about people based on their dialect
Hofmann, V., Kalluri, P. R., Jurafsky, D., & King, S. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07856-5 · Cited by 233
Organisciak, P., Acar, S., Dumas, D., & Berthiaume, K. (2023) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101356 · Cited by 202
What large language models know and what people think they know
Steyvers, M., Tejeda, H., Kumar, A., Belem, C., Karny, S., Hu, X., Mayer, L. W., & Smyth, P. (2025) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-024-00976-7 · Cited by 209
(2023) · doi:10.52202/075280-2425 · Cited by 200
Larger and more instructable language models become less reliable
Zhou, L., Schellaert, W., Martínez-Plumed, F., Moros-Daval, Y., Ferri, C., & Hernández-Orallo, J. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07930-y · Cited by 203
Medical large language models are vulnerable to data-poisoning attacks
Alber, D. A., Yang, Z., Alyakin, A., Yang, E., Rai, S., Valliani, A. A., Zhang, J., Rosenbaum, G. R., Amend-Thomas, A. K., Kurland, D. B., et al. (2025) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03445-1 · Cited by 242
“The 1.3-billion parameter models were trained for 30 billion tokens, while the 4-billion parameter LLMs received 100 billion tokens; both setups were consistent with compute-optimal scaling laws 29 .”
InfluentialAI chatbots not yet ready for clinical use.
Au Yeung, J., Kraljevic, Z., Luintel, A., Balston, A., Idowu, E., Dobson, R. J., & Teo, J. T. (2023) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2023.1161098 · Cited by 176
Can Generalist Foundation Models Outcompete Special-Purpose Tuning? Case Study in Medicine
Nori, H., Lee, Y. T., Zhang, S., Carignan, D., Edgar, R., Fusi, N., King, N., Larson, J., Li, Y., Liu, W., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.16452 · Cited by 178
Large Language Models and the Reverse Turing Test
Sejnowski, T. J. (2023) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco_a_01563 · Cited by 169
Large language models and their impact in ophthalmology
Betzler, B. K., Chen, H., Cheng, C.-Y., Lee, C. S., Ning, G., Song, S. J., Lee, A. Y., Kawasaki, R., van Wijngaarden, P., Grzybowski, A., et al. (2023) · The Lancet Digital Health · doi:10.1016/s2589-7500(23)00201-7 · Cited by 161
Choudhury, A., & Chaudhry, Z. (2024) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/56764 · Cited by 159
Self-supervised learning for human activity recognition using 700,000 person-days of wearable data
Yuan, H., Chan, S., Creagh, A. P., Tong, C., Acquah, A., Clifton, D. A., & Doherty, A. (2024) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01062-3 · Cited by 166
“The test performance for the AoT stayed at the random chance level, and the test performance for permutation dropped roughly 10 percentage points without weighted sampling.”
A comprehensive survey on pretrained foundation models: a history from BERT to ChatGPT
Zhou, C., Li, Q., Li, C., Yu, J., Liu, Y., Wang, G., Zhang, K., Ji, C., Yan, Q., He, L., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.09419 · Cited by 574
A Survey of Techniques for Optimizing Transformer Inference
Chitty-Venkata, K. T., Mittal, S., Emani, M., Vishwanath, V., & Somani, A. K. (2023) · Journal of Systems Architecture · doi:10.1016/j.sysarc.2023.102990 · Cited by 154
Can language models learn from explanations in context?
Lampinen, A., Dasgupta, I., Chan, S., Mathewson, K., Tessler, M., Creswell, A., McClelland, J., Wang, J., & Hill, F. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2022 · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-emnlp.38 · Cited by 142
A Theory for Emergence of Complex Skills in Language Models
Arora, S., & Goyal, A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.15936 · Cited by 129
Brinkmann, L., Baumann, F., Bonnefon, J.-F., Derex, M., Müller, T. F., Nussberger, A.-M., Czaplicka, A., Acerbi, A., Griffiths, T. L., Henrich, J., et al. (2023) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-023-01742-2 · Cited by 132
Language Models and Cognitive Automation for Economic Research
Korinek, A. (2023) · doi:10.3386/w30957 · Cited by 129
Singh, S., Nan, Y., Wang, A., D'Souza, D., Kapoor, S., Üstün, A., Koyejo, S., Deng, Y., Longpre, S., Smith, N. A., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.20879 · Cited by 108
History, development, and principles of large language models: an introductory survey
Wang, Z., Chu, Z., Doan, T. V., Ni, S., Yang, M., & Zhang, W. (2025) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-024-00583-7 · Cited by 109
DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermism
DeepSeek-AI, :, Bi, X., Chen, D., Chen, G., Chen, S., Dai, D., Deng, C., Ding, H., Dong, K., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.02954 · Cited by 99
“However, as shown in Table 4, early works (Hoffmann et al., 2022; Kaplan et al., 2020) on the optimal model/data scaling-up allocation strategy have shown varying conclusions, raising doubts about the general applicability of scaling laws.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialxLSTM: Extended Long Short-Term Memory
Beck, M., Pöppel, K., Spanring, M., Auer, A., Prudnikova, O., Kopp, M., Klambauer, G., Brandstetter, J., & Hochreiter, S. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.04517 · Cited by 299
From Word Embeddings to Pre-Trained Language Models: A State-of-the-Art Walkthrough
Mars, M. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12178805 · Cited by 91
The Revolution of Multimodal Large Language Models: A Survey
Caffagni, D., Cocchi, F., Barsellotti, L., Moratelli, N., Sarto, S., Baraldi, L., Baraldi, L., Cornia, M., & Cucchiara, R. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.807 · Cited by 98
Performance of Large Language Models on Medical Oncology Examination Questions
Longwell, J. B., Hirsch, I., Binder, F., Gonzalez Conchas, G. A., Mau, D., Jang, R., Krishnan, R. G., & Grant, R. C. (2024) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.17641 · Cited by 81
Contrasting Linguistic Patterns in Human and LLM-Generated News Text
Muñoz-Ortiz, A., Gómez-Rodríguez, C., & Vilares, D. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10903-2 · Cited by 94
Understanding Emergent Abilities of Language Models from the Loss Perspective
Du, Z., Zeng, A., Dong, Y., & Tang, J. (2024) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 · doi:10.52202/079017-1683 · Cited by 76
A Survey on Efficient Training of Transformers
Zhuang, B., Liu, J., Pan, Z., He, H., Weng, Y., & Shen, C. (2023) · Proceedings of the Thirty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2023/764 · Cited by 78
RLHF Deciphered: A Critical Analysis of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback for LLMs
Chaudhari, S., Aggarwal, P., Murahari, V., Rajpurohit, T., Kalyan, A., Narasimhan, K., Deshpande, A., & Castro da Silva, B. (2026) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3743127 · Cited by 92
Novel machine learning approaches revolutionize protein knowledge
Bordin, N., Dallago, C., Heinzinger, M., Kim, S., Littmann, M., Rauer, C., Steinegger, M., Rost, B., & Orengo, C. (2023) · Trends in Biochemical Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tibs.2022.11.001 · Cited by 72
Chan, A., Ezell, C., Kaufmann, M., Wei, K., Hammond, L., Bradley, H., Bluemke, E., Rajkumar, N., Krueger, D., Kolt, N., et al. (2024) · The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3630106.3658948 · Cited by 84
Muennighoff, N., Yang, Z., Shi, W., Li, X. L., Fei-Fei, L., Hajishirzi, H., Zettlemoyer, L., Liang, P., Candes, E., & Hashimoto, T. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.emnlp-main.1025 · Cited by 76
Distilling large language models for matching patients to clinical trials
Nievas, M., Basu, A., Wang, Y., & Singh, H. (2024) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocae073 · Cited by 67
Structured information extraction from complex scientific text with fine-tuned large language models
Dunn, A., Dagdelen, J., Walker, N., Lee, S., Rosen, A. S., Ceder, G., Persson, K., & Jain, A. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2212.05238 · Cited by 67
DeepNet: Scaling Transformers to 1,000 Layers
Wang, H., Ma, S., Dong, L., Huang, S., Zhang, D., & Wei, F. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2024.3386927 · Cited by 113
Lyu, W., Zhang, S., Chung, T., Sun, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2025) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100383 · Cited by 68
The BigScience ROOTS Corpus: A 1.6TB Composite Multilingual Dataset
Laurençon, H., Saulnier, L., Wang, T., Akiki, C., del Moral, A. V., Scao, T. L., Von Werra, L., Mou, C., Ponferrada, E. G., Nguyen, H., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.03915 · Cited by 93
“4 trillion tokens (Hoffmann et al., 2022) and dataset creation pipelines representing a significant part of large language model projects.”
BackgroundThe Quantization Model of Neural Scaling
Michaud, E. J., Liu, Z., Girit, U., & Tegmark, M. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.13506 · Cited by 57
Kuhn, L., Gal, Y., & Farquhar, S. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.09664 · Cited by 700
A Review of Current Trends, Techniques, and Challenges in Large Language Models (LLMs)
Patil, R., & Gudivada, A. V. (2024) · doi:10.20944/preprints202402.0357.v1 · Cited by 296
Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models
Muennighoff, N., Rush, A., Barak, B., Scao, T. L., Tazi, N., Piktus, A., Pyysalo, S., Wolf, T., & Raffel, C. (2023) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 · doi:10.52202/075280-2191 · Cited by 47
The Foundation Model Transparency Index
Bommasani, R., Klyman, K., Longpre, S., Kapoor, S., Maslej, N., Xiong, B., Zhang, D., & Liang, P. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.12941 · Cited by 46
Data Governance in the Age of Large-Scale Data-Driven Language Technology
Jernite, Y., Nguyen, H., Biderman, S., Rogers, A., Masoud, M., Danchev, V., Tan, S., Luccioni, A. S., Subramani, N., Johnson, I., et al. (2022) · 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness Accountability and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3531146.3534637 · Cited by 75
“[71] Jordan Hoffmann, Sebastian Borgeaud, Arthur Mensch, Elena Buchatskaya, Trevor Cai, Eliza Rutherford, Diego de Las Casas, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Johannes Welbl, Aidan Clark, Tom Hennigan, Eric Noland, Katie Millican, George van den Driessche, Bogdan Damoc, Aurelia Guy, Simon Osindero, Karen Simonyan, Erich Elsen, Ja…”
BackgroundEnhanced automated code vulnerability repair using large language models
de-Fitero-Dominguez, D., Garcia-Lopez, E., Garcia-Cabot, A., & Martinez-Herraiz, J.-J. (2024) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2024.109291 · Cited by 43
Hutchins, D., Schlag, I., Wu, Y., Dyer, E., & Neyshabur, B. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.07852 · Cited by 43
Towards Autonomous Testing Agents via Conversational Large Language Models
Feldt, R., Kang, S., Yoon, J., & Yoo, S. (2023) · 2023 38th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1109/ase56229.2023.00148 · Cited by 49
Studying and improving reasoning in humans and machines
Yax, N., Anlló, H., & Palminteri, S. (2024) · Communications Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44271-024-00091-8 · Cited by 40
MELTing Point: Mobile Evaluation of Language Transformers
Laskaridis, S., Katevas, K., Minto, L., & Haddadi, H. (2024) · Proceedings of the 30th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking · doi:10.1145/3636534.3690668 · Cited by 37
Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnet
Templeton, A., Conerly, T., Marcus, J., Lindsey, J., Bricken, T., Chen, B., Pearce, A., Citro, C., Ameisen, E., Jones, A., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.29358 · Cited by 36
Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models
Muennighoff, N., Rush, A. M., Barak, B., Scao, T. L., Piktus, A., Tazi, N., Pyysalo, S., Wolf, T., & Raffel, C. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.16264 · Cited by 49
Seger, E., Dreksler, N., Moulange, R., Dardaman, E., Schuett, J., Wei, K., Winter, C., Arnold, M., Ó hÉigeartaigh, S., Korinek, A., et al. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4596436 · Cited by 31
Large language models as tool makers
Cai, T., Wang, X., Ma, T., Chen, X., & Zhou, D. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.17126 · Cited by 28
Self-citationAlpaPICO: Extraction of PICO frames from clinical trial documents using LLMs.
Ghosh, M., Mukherjee, S., Ganguly, A., Basuchowdhuri, P., Naskar, S. K., & Ganguly, D. (2024) · Methods · doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2024.04.005 · Cited by 27
The rising costs of training frontier AI models
Cottier, B., Rahman, R., Fattorini, L., Maslej, N., Besiroglu, T., & Owen, D. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.21015 · Cited by 27
Computing Power and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence
Sastry, G., Heim, L., Belfield, H., Anderljung, M., Brundage, M., Hazell, J., O'Keefe, C., Hadfield, G. K., Ngo, R., Pilz, K., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.08797 · Cited by 26
Inverse Scaling Can Become U-Shaped
Wei, J., Kim, N., Tay, Y., & Le, Q. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.963 · Cited by 25
ERA-CoT: Improving Chain-of-Thought through Entity Relationship Analysis
Liu, Y., Peng, X., Du, T., Yin, J., Liu, W., & Zhang, X. (2024) · Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.476 · Cited by 22
Large Language Models Can Be Contextual Privacy Protection Learners
Xiao, Y., Jin, Y., Bai, Y., Wu, Y., Yang, X., Luo, X., Yu, W., Zhao, X., Liu, Y., Gu, Q., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.785 · Cited by 23
Large language models at work in China’s labor market
Chen, Q., Ge, J., Xie, H., Xu, X., & Yang, Y. (2025) · China Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.chieco.2025.102413 · Cited by 17
Algorithmic progress in language models
Ho, A., Besiroglu, T., Erdil, E., Owen, D., Rahman, R., Guo, Z. C., Atkinson, D., Thompson, N., & Sevilla, J. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.05812 · Cited by 16
Trained on 100 million words and still in shape: BERT meets British National Corpus
Samuel, D., Kutuzov, A., Øvrelid, L., & Velldal, E. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-eacl.146 · Cited by 14
Mirowski, P., Mathewson, K. W., Pittman, J., & Evans, R. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2209.14958 · Cited by 10
Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AI
Hammond, L., Chan, A., Clifton, J., Hoelscher-Obermaier, J., Khan, A., McLean, E., Smith, C., Barfuss, W., Foerster, J., Gavenčiak, T., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.14143 · Cited by 305
Scaling Instructable Agents Across Many Simulated Worlds
SIMA Team, Raad, M. A., Ahuja, A., Barros, C., Besse, F., Bolt, A., Bolton, A., Brownfield, B., Buttimore, G., Cant, M., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.10179 · Cited by 9
A Survey of Post-Training Scaling in Large Language Models
Lai, H., Liu, X., Gao, J., Cheng, J., Qi, Z., Xu, Y., Yao, S., Zhang, D., Du, J., Hou, Z., et al. (2025) · Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.140 · Cited by 8
Externalization in LLM Agents: A Unified Review of Memory, Skills, Protocols and Harness Engineering
Zhou, C., Chai, H., Chen, W., Guo, Z., Shan, R., Song, Y., Xu, T., Yang, Y., Yu, A., Zhang, W., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.08224 · Cited by 1
Unveiling the Key Factors for Distilling Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
Chen, X., Sun, Z., Wenjin, G., Zhang, M., Chen, Y., Sun, Y., Su, H., Pan, Y., Klakow, D., Li, W., et al. (2025) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.782 · Cited by 7
Efficient Benchmarking (of Language Models)
Perlitz, Y., Bandel, E., Gera, A., Arviv, O., Ein-Dor, L., Shnarch, E., Slonim, N., Shmueli-Scheuer, M., & Choshen, L. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-long.139 · Cited by 7
Artsi, Y., Klang, E., Collins, J. D., Glicksberg, B. S., Korfiatis, P., Nadkarni, G. N., & Sorin, V. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.03.18.25324193 · Cited by 7
What if eye...? Computationally recreating vision evolution
Tiwary, K., Young, A., Tasneem, Z., Klinghoffer, T., Dave, A., Poggio, T., Nilsson, D.-E., Cheung, B., & Raskar, R. (2025) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.ady2888 · Cited by 10
AgCV: An Agentic framework for automating computer vision application
Saxena, A., Chaudhari, A. Y., & Gupta, A. (2025) · MethodsX · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2025.103424 · Cited by 4
Observational Scaling Laws and the Predictability of Language Model Performance
Ruan, Y., Maddison, C. J., & Hashimoto, T. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.10938 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Hoffmann, J., Borgeaud, S., Mensch, A., Buchatskaya, E., Cai, T., Rutherford, E., Casas, D. D. L., Hendricks, L. A., Welbl, J., Clark, A., Hennigan, T., Noland, E., Millican, K., Driessche, G. V. D., Damoc, B., Guy, A., Osindero, S., Simonyan, K., Elsen, E., Rae, J. W., Vinyals, O., & Sifre, L.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- Pages
- 30016-30030
- ISSN
- 1049-5258 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2203.15556
- OpenAlex
- W7133225605
- Cited by
- 929
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 239 · 2025: 188 · 2024: 248 · 2023: 226 · 2022: 26
- FWCI
- 96.50
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- neural information processing systems (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- DeepMind
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Keywords
- large language models, computational efficiency, training efficiency, model compression, inference efficiency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
