Recipe — micro-AutoMixer for data-mix ratios (B21)

Stop hand-waving “50/30/20 code/web/math”. tinygpt automix searches the ratio: sample candidate mixes, score each with a short proxy train run, fit a quadratic surrogate, and propose the next mix by predicted improvement until gains fall below a threshold. Scaled down from Poolside’s Laguna recipe; DoReMi is the rigor target for V2.

Run

tinygpt automix \
  --corpus code=stack.txt --corpus web=fineweb.txt --corpus math=meta.txt \
  --proxy-runs 6 --proxy-steps 2000 --max-iters 4 \
  --out automix-report.jsonl

Outputs:

• automix-report.jsonl — one row per proxy run: {iter, source, score, ratio, predicted?} (source is sample for the initial Dirichlet draws, propose for surrogate picks).
• automix-recommendation.json — {ratio, best_score, runs, proxy_steps}.

V1 scores by negated final proxy-train loss. Task-eval scoring (BFCL/GSM8K via run-lm-eval) is the V2 extension; --task is reserved for it.

Interpreting the report

• score rising across propose rows → the surrogate is finding better mixes.
• The run stops when the best predicted improvement drops below --ei-threshold (default 0) — i.e. the surrogate no longer expects a better mix than the best seen.
• Trust the direction more than the absolute ratio: small proxies retain rank- correlation with full runs (Poolside’s claim), but proxy→full transfer is the documented V1 caveat — re-confirm the winning mix at the real scale.

How it works (and how it’s tested)

• MixSampler (TinyGPTModel) — symmetric-Dirichlet draws over corpora, seeded.
• SurrogateFit (TinyGPTModel) — ridge quadratic fit + predicted-improvement proposer.
• AutoMix (TinyGPT) — the loop; --dry-run swaps train+eval for a synthetic scorer with a known optimum so the whole search is CI-checkable without a GPU:

bash evals/automix-smoke.sh    # asserts the loop converges to the synthetic optimum

Unit tests: Tests/TinyGPTModelTests/AutoMixTests.swift (sampler validity, surrogate optimum recovery, solver).