In studies of transferable learning, scaling laws are obtained for various important foundation models to predict their properties and performance at larger scales. Taking language-vision learning as example, we show here how scaling law derivation can also be used for model and dataset comparison, allowing to decide which procedure is to be preferred for pre-training. Full scaling laws based on dense measurements across a wide span of model and samples seen scales are derived for two important language-vision learning procedures, CLIP and MaMMUT, that use either contrastive only or contrastive and captioning text generative loss. For the first time, we use derived scaling laws to compare both models and three open datasets, DataComp-1.4B, Re-LAION-1.4B and DFN-1.4B, while ensuring sufficient prediction accuracy on held out points. From comparison, we obtain evidence for (i) MaMMUT's stronger improvement with scale and better sample efficiency than standard CLIP (ii) DFN-1.4B outperforming other open datasets. To strengthen validity of the comparison, we show scaling laws for various downstream tasks, classification, retrieval, and segmentation, observing consistently the same scaling trends for models and datasets across tasks. We show that comparison can also be performed when deriving scaling laws with a constant learning rate schedule, reducing compute cost. Accurate derivation of scaling laws provides thus means to perform model and dataset comparison on aligned common compute axis across large scale span, avoiding misleading conclusions based on measurements from few isolated single reference scales only. This paves road for guided collective improvement of open foundation models and training datasets, as scaling law based comparisons from various studies executed in common frame can be combined to identify overall better procedures. We release all the pre-trained models with their intermediate checkpoints, including openMaMMUT-L/14, which achieves 80.3% zero-shot ImageNet-1k accuracy, trained on 12.8B samples from DataComp-1.4B. Code for reproducing experiments in the paper and raw experiments data can be found at https://github.com/LAION-AI/scaling-laws-for-comparison.

Kaplan et al. and Hoffmann et al. developed influential scaling laws for the optimal model size as a function of the compute budget, but these laws yield substantially different predictions. We explain the discrepancy by reproducing the Kaplan scaling law on two datasets (OpenWebText2 and RefinedWeb) and identifying three factors causing the difference: last layer computational cost, warmup duration, and scale-dependent optimizer tuning. With these factors corrected, we obtain excellent agreement with the Hoffmann et al. (i.e., "Chinchilla") scaling law. Counter to a hypothesis of Hoffmann et al., we find that careful learning rate decay is not essential for the validity of their scaling law. As a secondary result, we derive scaling laws for the optimal learning rate and batch size, finding that tuning the AdamW $\beta_2$ parameter is essential at lower batch sizes.