<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>2609.01343 on Jaehun's Blog</title><link>https://jaehun.me/en/tags/2609.01343/</link><description>Recent content in 2609.01343 on Jaehun's Blog</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2026 14:31:22 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://jaehun.me/en/tags/2609.01343/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>SMELT: Scaling Laws for Compute-Matched MoE Looped Transformers</title><link>https://jaehun.me/en/posts/smelt-scaling-laws-for-compute-matched-moe-looped-transformers/</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0900</pubDate><guid>https://jaehun.me/en/posts/smelt-scaling-laws-for-compute-matched-moe-looped-transformers/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a&#10; href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.01343"target="_blank"&#10; class="inline-flex items-center gap-1"&#10; &gt;Paper&lt;svg class="h-3 w-3 flex-shrink-0" id="external-link" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 24 24"&gt;&lt;path fill="none" stroke="currentColor" stroke-linecap="round" stroke-linejoin="round" stroke-width="2" d="M15 3h6v6m-11 5L21 3m-3 10v6a2 2 0 0 1-2 2H5a2 2 0 0 1-2-2V8a2 2 0 0 1 2-2h6"/&gt;&lt;/svg&gt;&#10; &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;h2 id="smelt-scaling-laws-for-compute-matched-moe-loop-transformers"&gt;SMELT: Scaling Laws for Compute-Matched MoE Loop Transformers&lt;a href="#smelt-scaling-laws-for-compute-matched-moe-loop-transformers" class="heading-anchor" aria-label="Link to this section"&gt;&lt;svg class="h-4 w-4" aria-hidden="true" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 24 24"&gt;&lt;g fill="none" stroke="currentColor" stroke-linecap="round" stroke-linejoin="round" stroke-width="2"&gt;&lt;path d="M10 13a5 5 0 0 0 7.54.54l3-3a5 5 0 0 0-7.07-7.07l-1.72 1.71"/&gt;&lt;path d="M14 11a5 5 0 0 0-7.54-.54l-3 3a5 5 0 0 0 7.07 7.07l1.71-1.71"/&gt;&lt;/g&gt;&lt;/svg&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;h2 id="tldr"&gt;TL;DR&lt;a href="#tldr" class="heading-anchor" aria-label="Link to this section"&gt;&lt;svg class="h-4 w-4" aria-hidden="true" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 24 24"&gt;&lt;g fill="none" stroke="currentColor" stroke-linecap="round" stroke-linejoin="round" stroke-width="2"&gt;&lt;path d="M10 13a5 5 0 0 0 7.54.54l3-3a5 5 0 0 0-7.07-7.07l-1.72 1.71"/&gt;&lt;path d="M14 11a5 5 0 0 0-7.54-.54l-3 3a5 5 0 0 0 7.07 7.07l1.71-1.71"/&gt;&lt;/g&gt;&lt;/svg&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;&lt;p&gt;Loop transformers scale depth by executing a layer block repeatedly, but most prior work fixed &lt;strong&gt;only the parameter count&lt;/strong&gt; and let FLOPs grow, racking up &amp;ldquo;free wins.&amp;rdquo; SMELT shows that looping is a pure architectural gain even while matching all three budgets — &lt;strong&gt;per-token FLOPs, total parameters, and KV cache&lt;/strong&gt; — simultaneously (source: §1). On the compute-optimal frontier it saves &lt;strong&gt;6.8–18.0% of training FLOPs&lt;/strong&gt;, and these gains come out larger downstream than validation loss predicts (source: §4.3, §5.1).&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>