victormiller commited on
Commit
933e0d6
·
verified ·
1 Parent(s): faf45c3

Update curated.py

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. curated.py +1 -7
curated.py CHANGED
@@ -313,12 +313,7 @@ dedup_text = P("Deduplication is crucial in language model (LM) pre-training for
313
  dedup_text1 = P("Our deduplication process began with 61.8 TB of high-quality, filtered, and compressed documents, totaling approximately 48.83 billion documents. We first performed exact deduplication using a Bloom filter, reducing the dataset by 17% to 40.21 billion documents. For global near-deduplication, we scaled methodologies from prior works like SlimPajama to handle the entire dataset, including 87 Common Crawl dumps and other curated data. This involved generating document signatures, matching them to identify near-duplicates, and clustering these to retain only one document per cluster. We prioritized retaining documents from curated sources and more recent CommonCrawl dumps. Throughout the deduplication stages, we extensively used Dask for distributed data processing.")
314
  dedup_text2 = P("After the global near-deduplication of all 87 CommonCrawl dumps and other curated data, we removed around 85% of the total documents. This leaves us with approximately 4.24 trillion deduplicated tokens, which aligns with what FineWeb has reported for their iterative global deduplication. Along with the list of duplicated documents to delete, our deduplication code also saves some metadata about the duplicate clusters that we find. We save statistics about every duplicate cluster we find, with the document ID of the document we retain from the cluster as the key and with a value capturing the distribution of the duplicates within the cluster over the CommonCrawl dumps (identified by the first 2 digits of every document ID). This way, we always have information about the duplicates we have deleted, allowing us to upsample any data distribution we want for training.")
315
  dedup_text3 = P("During deduplication, it is not feasible to store all the duplicate clusters we form, but we do save some samples at every size. Here are some observations we made by examining these sample duplicate clusters:")
316
- dedup_text4 = OL(
317
- Li("Smaller components tend to have more overlap in their MinHash bands."),
318
- Li("The smallest components, which are essentially pairs, consist of exact duplicate documents that local exact deduplication missed."),
319
- Li("When clusters contain three or more documents, incremental changes in the text become apparent. For example, there may be a growing list of personnel over the years."),
320
- Li("In sizable clusters comprising 1,000 or more documents, we observe a trend towards templatization. This involves the recurrent use of standardized language to convey general topics such as terms and conditions, warnings, and disclaimers. Such language is prevalent on commercial websites, offering a consistent and efficient way to communicate commonly encountered information."),
321
- )
322
 
323
 
324
 
@@ -336,7 +331,6 @@ dedup_text4 = OL(
336
  dedup_text1,
337
  dedup_text2,
338
  dedup_text3,
339
- dedup_text4,
340
  id="inner-text",
341
  )
342
  )
 
313
  dedup_text1 = P("Our deduplication process began with 61.8 TB of high-quality, filtered, and compressed documents, totaling approximately 48.83 billion documents. We first performed exact deduplication using a Bloom filter, reducing the dataset by 17% to 40.21 billion documents. For global near-deduplication, we scaled methodologies from prior works like SlimPajama to handle the entire dataset, including 87 Common Crawl dumps and other curated data. This involved generating document signatures, matching them to identify near-duplicates, and clustering these to retain only one document per cluster. We prioritized retaining documents from curated sources and more recent CommonCrawl dumps. Throughout the deduplication stages, we extensively used Dask for distributed data processing.")
314
  dedup_text2 = P("After the global near-deduplication of all 87 CommonCrawl dumps and other curated data, we removed around 85% of the total documents. This leaves us with approximately 4.24 trillion deduplicated tokens, which aligns with what FineWeb has reported for their iterative global deduplication. Along with the list of duplicated documents to delete, our deduplication code also saves some metadata about the duplicate clusters that we find. We save statistics about every duplicate cluster we find, with the document ID of the document we retain from the cluster as the key and with a value capturing the distribution of the duplicates within the cluster over the CommonCrawl dumps (identified by the first 2 digits of every document ID). This way, we always have information about the duplicates we have deleted, allowing us to upsample any data distribution we want for training.")
315
  dedup_text3 = P("During deduplication, it is not feasible to store all the duplicate clusters we form, but we do save some samples at every size. Here are some observations we made by examining these sample duplicate clusters:")
316
+
 
 
 
 
 
317
 
318
 
319
 
 
331
  dedup_text1,
332
  dedup_text2,
333
  dedup_text3,
 
334
  id="inner-text",
335
  )
336
  )