How to Scale Mixture-of-Experts: From muP to the Maximally Scale-Stable Parameterization

Recent frontier large language models predominantly rely on Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures. Despite empirical progress, there is still no principled understanding of how hyperparameters should scale with network width $N$, expert width $N_e$, number of experts $M$, sparsity $K$, and depth $L$ to ensure both stability and optimal performance at scale. We take a principled step toward resolving this gap by analyzing three different scaling regimes: (I) co-scaling $N\asymp N_e$, (II) co-scaling $N\asymp M\asymp K$, and (III) full proportional scaling of $N, N_e, M$, and $K$. For each regime, we develop a novel Dynamical Mean Field Theory (DMFT) description of the limiting training dynamics of MoEs that provides a formal foundation for our analysis. Within this framework, we derive the unique parameterization for SGD and Adam satisfying all maximal-update ($\mu$) desiderata. We then show that the resulting $\mu$P prescription induces neither monotonic improvement with scale nor robust learning-rate transfer. We trace these pathologies to scale-dependent observables in the aggregation dynamics, which motivates a refined set of desiderata that we term *maximal scale stability*. Guided by this principle, we derive a *Maximally Scale-Stable Parameterization* (MSSP) for both SGD and Adam in all three scaling regimes, and characterize the corresponding limiting dynamics - qualitatively distinct from the $\mu$P limit - through a separate DMFT analysis. Experiments verify that MSSP robustly recovers learning rate transfer and monotonic improvement with scale across regimes. Combined with existing depth-scaling theory, these results provide a complete scaling prescription for MoE architectures as a function of width, depth, expert width, and number of experts.