PreprintCited by 117Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 50 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 15 are not checked yet.

DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermism

Open access

Abstract

The rapid development of open-source large language models (LLMs) has been truly remarkable. However, the scaling law described in previous literature presents varying conclusions, which casts a dark cloud over scaling LLMs. We delve into the study of scaling laws and present our distinctive findings that facilitate scaling of large scale models in two commonly used open-source configurations, 7B and 67B. Guided by the scaling laws, we introduce DeepSeek LLM, a project dedicated to advancing open-source language models with a long-term perspective. To support the pre-training phase, we have developed a dataset that currently consists of 2 trillion tokens and is continuously expanding. We further conduct supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) on DeepSeek LLM Base models, resulting in the creation of DeepSeek Chat models. Our evaluation results demonstrate that DeepSeek LLM 67B surpasses LLaMA-2 70B on various benchmarks, particularly in the domains of code, mathematics, and reasoning. Furthermore, open-ended evaluations reveal that DeepSeek LLM 67B Chat exhibits superior performance compared to GPT-3.5.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2401.02954

Cites

50 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

  • Attention Is All You Need

    Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404 · cited 1×

    “Over the past few years, Large Language Models (LLMs) based on decoder-only Transformers (Vaswani et al., 2017) have increasingly become the cornerstone and pathway to achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI).”
    Background
  • Language Models are Few-Shot Learners

    Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372 · cited 2×

    “Results in scaling laws demonstrate that expanding the compute budget continues to yield significant benefits, which further encourages the increase in model scales (Brown et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2022).”
    BackgroundMethod
  • Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models

    Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Henighan, T., Brown, T. B., Chess, B., Child, R., Gray, S., Radford, A., Wu, J., & Amodei, D. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.08361 · Cited by 9,550 · cited 7×

    “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.”
    BackgroundMethodResultInfluential
  • LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models

    Touvron, H., Lavril, T., Izacard, G., Martinet, X., Lachaux, M.-A., Lacroix, T., Rozière, B., Goyal, N., Hambro, E., Azhar, F., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.13971 · Cited by 4,602 · cited 16×

    “Consequently, the LLaMA series has become the de facto benchmark for architecture and performance among open-source models.”
    BackgroundMethodInfluential
  • Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models

    Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q., & Zhou, D. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2201.11903 · Cited by 4,263 · cited 1×

    “As a significant proportion of the SFT instances are in the CoT format Wei et al. (2022), the chat models demonstrate slight improvements in reasoning tasks, such as BBH and NaturalQuestions.”
    Background
  • PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Language

    Bisk, Y., Zellers, R., Bras, R. L., Gao, J.-F., & Choi, Y. (2019) · AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1911.11641 · Cited by 3,856

  • Transformer-XL: Attentive language models beyond a fixed-length context

    Dai, Z., Yang, Z., Yang, Y., Carbonell, J., Le, Q., & Salakhutdinov, R. (2019) · Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1285 · Cited by 3,169 · cited 12×

    “By predicting the next word in continuous text, LLMs undergo self-supervised pre-training on massive datasets, enabling them to achieve various purposes and possess many abilities, such as novel creation, text summarization, code completion, and more.”
    BackgroundInfluential
  • Training Language Models to Follow Instructions with Human Feedback

    Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-2011 · Cited by 3,117 · cited 14×

    “The value of SFT lies in the ability to learn to achieve comparable scores to the base model’s few-shot setting in the chat model’s zero-shot setting, which is aligned with real scenarios.”
    MethodInfluential
  • Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models

    Touvron, H., Martin, L., Stone, K., Albert, P., Almahairi, A., Babaei, Y., Bashlykov, N., Batra, S., Bhargava, P., Bhosale, S., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.09288 · Cited by 2,604

    Self-citation
  • Accurate, Large Minibatch SGD: Training ImageNet in 1 Hour

    Goyal, P., Dollár, P., Girshick, R., Noordhuis, P., Wesolowski, L., Kyrola, A., Tulloch, A., Jia, Y., & He, K. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.02677 · Cited by 2,294 · cited 1×

    “Early works (Goyal et al., 2017; McCandlish et al., 2018; Shallue et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2019) provided some empirical observations for setting batch size and learning rate, but we found these observations have limited applicability in our preliminary experiments.”
    Result

Show all 71 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. F. i, M. Suzgun, M. Freitag, X. Wang, S. Srivats, S. Vosoughi, H. W. Chung, Y. Tay, S. Ruder, D. Zhou, D. Das, and J. Wei. Language models are multilingual chain-of-thought reasoners. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2023, Kigali, Rwanda, May 1-5, 2023. OpenReview.net, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/pdf?id= fR3wGCk-IXp.
  2. I. Loshchilov and F. Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017. · arXiv
  3. OpenAI. GPT4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. · arXiv
  4. A. Radford, J. Wu, R. Child, D. Luan, D. Amodei, I. Sutskever, et al. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog, 1(8):9, 2019.
  5. S. Rajbhandari, J. Rasley, O. Ruwase, and Y. He. Zero: Memory optimizations toward training tril- lion parameter models. In SC20: International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, pages 1-16. IEEE, 2020.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–117 of 117

Metadata

Authors
DeepSeek-AI, :, Bi, X., Chen, D., Chen, G., Chen, S., Dai, D., Deng, C., Ding, H., Dong, K., Du, Q., Fu, Z., Gao, H., Gao, K., Gao, W., Ge, R., Guan, K., Guo, D., Guo, J., Hao, G., Hao, Z., He, Y., Hu, W., Huang, P., Li, E., Li, G., Li, J., Li, Y., Li, Y. K., Liang, W., Lin, F., Liu, A. X., Liu, B., Liu, W., Liu, X., Liu, X., Liu, Y., Lu, H., Lu, S., Luo, F., Ma, S., Nie, X., Pei, T., Piao, Y., Qiu, J., Qu, H., Ren, T., Ren, Z., Ruan, C., Sha, Z., Shao, Z., Song, J., Su, X., Sun, J., Sun, Y., Tang, M., Wang, B., Wang, P., Wang, S., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wu, T., Wu, Y., Xie, X., Xie, Z., Xie, Z., Xiong, Y., Xu, H., Xu, R. X., Xu, Y., Yang, D., You, Y., Yu, S., Yu, X., Zhang, B., Zhang, H., Zhang, L., Zhang, L., Zhang, M., Zhang, M., Zhang, W., Zhang, Y., Zhao, C., Zhao, Y., Zhou, S., Zhou, S., Zhu, Q., & Zou, Y.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390690464
Cited by
99
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 16
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
open-source large language models, scaling laws, long-termism, pre-training dataset, supervised fine-tuning, direct preference optimization, code generation, mathematical reasoning

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