cs.LGSep 23, 2026

The Capability Manifold and ML Scaling Laws

Authors: Syed Ali Raza ZaidiMaryam Hafeez

Abstract

Existing machine learning (ML) scaling laws relate predictive loss to compute, model parameters, and data. However, as models are increasingly deployed through agentic harnesses, loss alone is insufficient to characterize downstream performance: models with similar loss can exhibit different capabilities in reasoning, retrieval, planning, and adaptation. Yet, no unified framework connects such capabilities to the coupled resources available across the ML lifecycle. We bridge this gap by introducing a capability manifold, a multidimensional framework mapping downstream capabilities to pre-training, post-training, and test-time resources through bounded scaling functions. Analytical Jacobians quantify capability sensitivity to resource changes and interactions. As an initial application, we embed Kaplan- and Chinchilla-type scaling laws and test-time compute within the framework, demonstrating how existing scaling relationships can be unified as trajectories on a common capability manifold.

Explore similar work

May 9, 2026cs.LG

Practical Scaling Laws: Converting Compute into Performance in a Data-Constrained World

The scaling laws guiding modern model training were calibrated for a single regime: data-rich, single-epoch pretraining. The dominant such scaling law form, Chinchilla's L=E+A/Nα+B/DβL = E + A/N^α+ B/D^β, has three structural limitations outside that regime: it diverges as unique data shrinks instead of saturating at the uninformed baseline; it cannot represent overfitting when capacity exceeds the data; and it conflates total examples seen with unique examples available. We propose a closed-form extension, L(N,D,T)=E+(L0E)h/(1+h)L(N, D, T) = E + (L_0 - E)\,h/(1+h) with h=a/Nα+b/Tβ+cNγ/Dδh = a/N^α+ b/T^β+ c\,N^γ/D^δ, that decomposes loss into undercapacity, undertraining, and overfitting terms. It saturates between the irreducible loss EE and an uninformed baseline L0L_0 fixed by the loss type, and reduces to Chinchilla in the data-rich, single-epoch limit. We validate it on four multi-epoch experiments spanning four architecture families (MLPs, ResNets, Fourier neural operators, and transformers) across vision, scientific ML, and language domains, and refit it to five published LLM scaling-law grids. Extrapolating to higher compute and larger unique data than seen at fit time, our form achieves state-of-the-art RMSE on every published LLM grid we evaluate and on most cells of our constructed experiments. Once calibrated, the form admits a cost-aware allocation that recovers Chinchilla's optimum when data is free and shifts toward smaller corpora and more epochs as data grows expensive.
Christopher M. Bryant, Hao Liu
Aug 7, 2026cs.CL

Skaling: Chinchilla's Exponents Meet Kaplan's Coupling

Neural scaling laws are foundational for language model development, yet standard formulations systematically under- and overestimate loss at data-scarce and overtraining extremes. This failure originates in the underlying assumption that model size and training data impact the loss independently. To address this, we introduce the Skaling law, a generalized functional form that couples model capacity and data through a single interaction exponent. This simple extension reduces the Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) by 1.5-3x across both interpolation and extrapolation regimes. When paired with a sparse grid strategy restricted to low-compute regimes, the Skaling law achieves accurate full-grid extrapolation using approximately 10x less compute than uniform sweeps. By enabling reliable performance prediction from small-scale experiments, the Skaling law provides a more robust and resource-efficient framework for allocating compute budgets in next-generation model training.
Mathurin Videau, Badr Youbi-Idrissi, David Lopez-Paz +1
Sep 22, 2026cs.LG

Scaling of Capability and Efficiency at Inference Time in Large Reasoning Models

Capability and efficiency are two key dimensions of reasoning in large language models (LLMs). Capability refers to the ability to solve a given problem correctly, whereas efficiency refers to the ability to do so with limited resources. When LLMs use Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning to solve problems of controlled hardness, both the number of problems solved correctly and the number of tokens required to reach a correct answer depend on problem hardness and model size. However, how these factors jointly shape capability and efficiency remains poorly understood. Here, we use hierarchical Bayesian models to evaluate the capability and efficiency of LLMs from the DeepSeek-R1-Distill model family across four classes of arithmetic and algorithmic reasoning problems. At a fixed model size, the probability of correctly solving an instance decays approximately exponentially with instance size, our proxy for problem hardness. The decay scale grows sublinearly with model size, indicating that larger models are more capable, but that capability gains diminish with scale. Output length grows as a power law with instance size, which serves as a proxy for difficulty. However, the parameters of this power law do not vary systematically with model size, suggesting that larger models do not become more efficient. Together, these findings reveal potential limitations of naive scaling as a strategy for developing more capable AI systems: capability improves with diminishing returns, while efficiency shows little to no improvement.
Moritz Laber, Zohair Shafi, Germans Savcisens +5