Curriculum learning—organizing training data from easy to hard—has improved efficiency across machine learning domains, yet remains underexplored for language model pretraining. We present the first systematic investigation of curriculum learning in LLM pretraining, with over 200 models trained on up to 100B tokens across three strategies: vanilla curriculum learning, pacing-based sampling, and interleaved curricula, guided by six difficulty metrics spanning linguistic and information-theoretic properties. We evaluate performance on eight benchmarks under three realistic scenarios: limited data, unlimited data, and continual training. Our experiments show that curriculum learning consistently accelerates convergence in early and mid-training phases, reducing training steps by 18-45% to reach baseline performance. When applied as a warmup strategy before standard random sampling, curriculum learning yields sustained improvements up to 3.5%. We identify compression ratio, lexical diversity (MTLD), and readability (Flesch Reading Ease) as the most effective difficulty signals. Our findings demonstrate that data ordering—orthogonal to existing data selection methods—provides a practical mechanism for more efficient LLM pretraining.

Code-switching (CSW) is the act of alternating between two or more languages within a single discourse. This phenomenon is widespread in multilingual communities and increasingly prevalent online, exposing large language models (LLMs) to mixed-language inputs. We present a systematic evaluation of LLM *comprehension* under code-switching by generating linguistically grounded CSW variants of established benchmarks (Belebele, MMLU, XNLI) across five typologically diverse languages. Our contributions are: (i) a controlled pipeline for producing CSW test sets that respect linguistic constraints on code-switching; (ii) a multi-model, multi-language analysis showing that inserting non-English tokens into English consistently reduces accuracy on comprehension and reasoning benchmarks, whereas embedding English into non-English contexts often improves it; and (iii) a mitigation study contrasting in-context learning (ICL) with fine-tuning. Across model families, ICL cues yield inconsistent, and sometimes negative, effects, while fine-tuning on CSW data provides modest but reliable gains, partially recovering accuracy under CSW.