Active Instruction Tuning: Improving Cross-Task Generalization by Training on Prompt Sensitive Tasks (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Instruction tuning (IT) achieves impressive zero-shot generalization results by training large language models on diverse tasks with instructions. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to identify informative tasks and then actively tune models on selected tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms baseline strategies for task selection on NIV2 and Self-Instruct datasets. |
Similar Papers
Instruction Matters: A Simple yet Effective Task Selection for Optimized Instruction Tuning of Specific Tasks (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Experimental results show that instruction tuning improves zero-shot generalization across various tasks and improves performance of specific tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a task selection method that leverages instruction information alone to identify relevant tasks and optimize instruction tuning for specific tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method is significantly more efficient than traditional approaches, which require complex measurements of pairwise transferability between tasks or the creation of data samples for the target task. |
Differentiable Instruction Optimization for Cross-Task Generalization (2023.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies have shown that instruction tuning is effective for generalizing to arbitrary tasks unseen during training. |
| Approach: | They propose to introduce learnable instructions and optimize them with gradient descent to optimize instruction for generalization ability. |
| Outcome: | The proposed instruction extractor extracts appropriate instruction and improves generalization ability compared to manual instruction tuning. |
Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuning Makes Generalized and Calibrated Neural Text Retrievers (2023.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Prompt tuning is a technique that updates few parameters in pre-trained models for language understanding and generation tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to leverage prompt tuning for neural text retrieval to improve generalization and cross-domain generalization. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach can mitigate the two issues faced by fine-tuning retrieval methods and improve the out-of-domain zero-shot generalization of the retrieval models. |
PAFT: Prompt-Agnostic Fine-Tuning (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Prompt-agnostic fine-tuning (PAFT) improves performance by reducing overfitting to specific prompts. |
| Approach: | They propose a method that enhances robustness through dynamic prompt variation during training. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method achieves higher generalization accuracy on unseen prompts than standard methods with similar training efficiency. |
Specialist or Generalist? Instruction Tuning for Specific NLP Tasks (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies have shown that instruction tuning can be a data-efficient method for transforming large language models into generalist models, but their performance lags behind specialist models trained exclusively for specific tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to incorporate broadcoverage generalist instruction tuning into large language models to build a specialist model by incorporating task specificity and skill requirements. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves model performance when task coverage is broad and when training data is limited. |
Chasing Random: Instruction Selection Strategies Fail to Generalize (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Prior work has shown that language models can be tuned to follow user instructions using only a small set of high-quality instructions. |
| Approach: | They analyze popular selection strategies across different datasets and benchmarks to find out whether they generalize poorly. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods outperform random baselines and cost-performance trade-offs on the full dataset and a random subset. |
The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuning (2021.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Unlike discrete text prompts used by GPT-3, soft prompts are learned through backpropagation and can be tuned to incorporate signals from any number of labeled examples. |
| Approach: | They propose a mechanism for learning "soft prompts" to condition frozen language models to perform specific downstream tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms fewshot learning using GPT-3 and matches the quality of model tuning as models exceed billions of parameters. |
Multi-Task Transfer Matters During Instruction-Tuning (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Instruction-tuning improves a model’s ability to learn in-context, but the mechanisms that drive in-constext learning are poorly understood. |
| Approach: | They propose to train a model on hundreds of tasks to improve its ability to learn in-context. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods improve model transfer and in-context generalization, suggesting catastrophic forgetting may impact in-constext learning. |
Fine-Tuning Large Language Models with Sequential Instructions (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing instruction-tuned models struggle to adhere to a query with multiple intentions, which impairs their performance when the completion of several tasks is demanded by a single command. |
| Approach: | They develop an automatic process that turns existing data into diverse and complex task chains and a new benchmark to evaluate a model’s ability to follow all the instructions in a sequence. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can follow instructions better and deliver higher results in coding, maths, and open-ended generation. |
Do Models Really Learn to Follow Instructions? An Empirical Study of Instruction Tuning (2023.acl-short)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies on instruction tuning (IT) have achieved great performance with zero-shot generalizability to unseen tasks. |
| Approach: | They analyze how models utilize instructions during IT by comparing model training with altered vs. original instructions. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms naive models in low resource setting. |