Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Compares Odu-stratified training against random sampling for language model performance, suggesting improved evaluation metrics.
Training data for modern language models is typically bucketed by coarse domain labels or filtered by quality heuristics, with no principled fine-grained taxonomy of conceptual or affective states for coverage. We propose the Odu-256 Training Curriculum: a 256-state product taxonomy derived from a 16-by-16 archetype product space. Each state is identified by a 4-bit-by-4-bit code; the 16 diagonal cases are resonance states (stable single-archetype), and the 240 off-diagonal cases are transition states. We describe how to use this taxonomy for stratified training (uniform-over-state or corpus-weighted sampling), stratified evaluation (per-state metrics that reveal which conceptual states the model handles well or poorly), and curriculum ordering. The taxonomy aligns by construction with the Vortex-keyed routing architecture (companion preprint): the 16 archetypes are the routing primitives, so per-Odu evaluation yields per-expert evaluation. We outline a pretraining and evaluation program comparing Odu-stratified mixtures against uniform random sampling on standard benchmarks and proposed diversity metrics. Empirical results are deferred to v1.1.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Weslyn Cory Whitehead (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: