FineWeb2: One Pipeline to Scale Them All - Adapting Pre-Training Data Processing to Every Language
Open accessAbstract
Pre-training state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) requires vast amounts of clean and diverse text data. While the open development of large high-quality English pre-training datasets has seen substantial recent progress, training performant multilingual LLMs remains a challenge, in large part due to the inherent difficulty of tailoring filtering and deduplication pipelines to a large number of languages. In this work, we introduce a new pre-training dataset curation pipeline based on FineWeb that can be automatically adapted to support any language. We extensively ablate our pipeline design choices on a set of nine diverse languages, guided by a set of meaningful and informative evaluation tasks that were chosen through a novel selection process based on measurable criteria. Ultimately, we show that our pipeline can be used to create non-English corpora that produce more performant models than prior datasets. We additionally introduce a straightforward and principled approach to rebalance datasets that takes into consideration both duplication count and quality, providing an additional performance uplift. Finally, we scale our pipeline to over 1000 languages using almost 100 Common Crawl snapshots to produce FineWeb2, a new 20 terabyte (5 billion document) multilingual dataset which we release along with our pipeline, training, and evaluation codebases.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Aggregating whole Common Crawl snapshots yields only several hundred billion tokens for comparatively well-represented languages such as Chinese, German, and Japanese, far below multi-trillion-token scales.
“Aggregating the whole Common Crawl snapshots 2 yields only several hundred billion tokens for comparatively wellrepresented languages such as Chinese, German, and Japanese (Penedo et al., 2025), far below the multi-trillion-token scales.”
From Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models with Synthetic Data (2026) · cites this paper as Penedo et al., 2025
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models with Synthetic Data
Kiyomaru, H., Oda, Y., Kodama, T., Liu, C., & Kawahara, D. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.52
“Common Crawl snapshots 2 yields only several hundred billion tokens for comparatively well-represented languages such as Chinese, German, and Japanese (Penedo et al., 2025), far below the multi-trillion-token scales.”
- Authors
- Penedo, G., Kydlíček, H., Sabolčec, V., Messmer, B., Foroutan, N., Kargaran, A. H., Raffel, C., Jaggi, M., Von Werra, L., & Wolf, T.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2506.20920
- OpenAlex
- W4415181821
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Keywords
- large language models, Common Crawl, cross-lingual evaluation
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