A Diversity Diet for a Healthier Model: A Case Study of French ModernBERT

Data selection for language model pretraining faces a fundamental tension between quality and diversity. While quality filtering is empirically effective, it often induces diversity collapse: by favoring texts similar to high-quality reference corpora (e.g., educational or QA-style data), it systematically excludes valuable data from underrepresented domains. In contrast, diversified selection preserves domain balance and encourages robust downstream performance, yet existing methods either focus on coverage-oriented objectives that indirectly enhance diversity, or directly optimize for diversity via costly covariance matrix recomputation that limits scalability. To address these issues, we introduce Leverage Score Sampling (Lev), which iteratively selects samples that maximally expand the determinantal volume of the embedded data via leverage scores, a computationally efficient criterion that eliminates matrix recomputation and enables scalable selection. Empirically, Lev delivers up to $72\times$ speedup and improves dataset diversity, measured by the Vendi score, by $9.2\%$ over the strong diversification baseline DiSF. On CommonCrawl (CC) web data selection, Lev improves accuracy across seven downstream tasks by up to $1.31\%$ over existing baselines. For domains where robust quality criteria are inherently difficult to define (e.g., code), Lev serves as an effective unsupervised curation alternative: on StarCoderData, the selected subset reduces bits-per-byte by $3.08\%$ over DiSF. Notably, we uncover a cross-domain collapse of quality filtering: CC data filtered by DCLM-fastText fail to retain sufficient code-related content, yielding inferior code performance relative to Lev-selected data. These findings advocate for integrating diversity-aware practices into quality filtering for more effective data curation in language model pretraining.

How diverse are the outputs of large language models when diversity is desired? We examine the diversity of responses of several language models to questions with multiple possible answers, comparing them with human responses. Our findings suggest that models' responses are highly concentrated, reflecting narrow, mainstream outputs, in comparison to humans, whose responses exhibit a much longer-tail. We examine three simple and practical ways to increase output diversity: 1) increasing generation randomness via temperature sampling; 2) prompting models to answer from diverse perspectives using a single prompt; 3) aggregating outputs from several models. We find that these interventions, especially when combined, can substantially increase output diversity, although single-model outputs generally remain less diverse than the human baseline. We discuss potential implications of these findings for future work in AI policy and governance that wishes to preserve cultural diversity, an essential building block of a democratic social fabric.

Recent work by Doshi and Hauser (2024), Bisbee et al. (2024), and Xie et al. (2026) raises concerns that outputs from large language models (LLMs) tend to be under-diverse: they repeat or resemble one another more often than responses from the population they are meant to represent, a phenomenon known as mode collapse. In this work, we show that whether mode-collapse, or its opposite, occurs depends on the specific model and dataset used. Further, with sufficient supervised fine-tuning (SFT) data, LLM output diversity converges toward that of the target distribution from which fine-tuning data are sampled. To quantify this comparison, we measure the probability that two responses sampled independently from the same fixed prompt coincide (collide), or their expected similarity under a kernel. We derive a bias-variance decomposition of the expected gap between the model's and target's collision probabilities, showing that SFT is not inherently biased toward mode collapse or its opposite: finite-sample SFT can leave a model either under- or over-dispersed, depending on the model and dataset. Finally, we show that the absolute gap is bounded by the square root of the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence from the target distribution to the model. Consequently, a model sufficiently close to optimal under population cross-entropy cannot exhibit arbitrarily miscalibrated diversity. We test the decomposition and the bound in three experiments: small transformers on synthetic languages, four LLMs fine-tuned on human surveys, and these LLMs fine-tuned on CodeNet, a dataset of human code solutions. More target data moves model diversity toward the human (or synthetic target) level in all experiments, consistent with our theoretical predictions. These results show that diversity miscalibration can arise from finite-sample error and shrink as SFT better approximates the target distribution.