PreprintCited by 1Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior

FineWeb2: One Pipeline to Scale Them All - Adapting Pre-Training Data Processing to Every Language

Open access
Penedo, Guilherme, Kydlíček, Hynek, Sabolčec, Vinko, Messmer, Bettina, Foroutan, Negar, Kargaran, Amir Hossein, Raffel, Colin, Jaggi, Martin +2 more·2025·arXiv

Abstract

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2506.20920

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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

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)
OpenAlex
W4415181821
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
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