Which Long Documents Matter? A Controlled Study of Data Selection for Context Extension
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Natural long documents are widely used for context extension, but which selection pipelines are effective remains unclear. We conduct a controlled comparison on Qwen2.5-3B at 128K under matched 6B-token continued-training budgets. Random sampling of natural long documents (random-long) outperforms repacking at longer evaluation lengths. Within the same candidate pool, selecting documents with high LongPPL key-token density yields further gains, unlike the evaluated generic-quality and LLM-judge selectors. We introduce truncLongPPL to reduce scoring cost by computing key-token density over a truncated prefix. At 128K, scoring the first half of the reference span yields downstream performance close to full-span scoring with a measured $2.28\times$ end-to-end scoring speedup. Across three training seeds, truncLongPPL achieves the highest mean scores among evaluated pipelines, exceeding random-long by 4.54 points on validation HELMET and 3.28 on held-out RULER, with gains most consistent in retrieval. At a 256K target context, it gains 2.82 average RULER points over random-long on Qwen2.5-3B. In short/long mixed training across Qwen2.5-3B, Qwen3-8B, and OLMo~3-7B, it gains 1.47--7.31 average RULER points over random-long mixing, with seven-task short-context averages within 0.23 points of the corresponding baselines. After supervised fine-tuning (SFT), Qwen3-8B and OLMo~3-7B models trained with selected long documents outperform their random-long counterparts by 1.13--1.67 points on LongBench v2 and 0.62--1.44 points on MRCR.
Results and benchmarks
Natural long documents are widely used for context extension, but which selection pipelines are effective remains unclear.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Retrieval / indexing
Methods
Transformer, Retrieval-augmented generation
Domains
Large Language Models, Information Retrieval
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.