REVIEW 2 cited by
In-Context Example Ordering Guided by Label Distributions
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
By allowing models to predict without task-specific training, in-context learning (ICL) with pretrained LLMs has enormous potential in NLP. However, a number of problems persist in ICL. In particular, its performance is sensitive to the choice and order of in-context examples. Given the same set of in-context examples with different orderings, model performance may vary between near random to near state-of-the-art. In this work, we formulate in-context example ordering as an optimization problem. We examine three problem settings that differ in the assumptions they make about what is known about the task. Inspired by the idea of learning from label proportions, we propose two principles for in-context example ordering guided by model's probability predictions. We apply our proposed principles to thirteen text classification datasets and nine different autoregressive LLMs with 700M to 13B parameters. We demonstrate that our approach outperforms the baselines by improving the classification accuracy, reducing model miscalibration, and also by selecting better in-context examples.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Position Bias Undermines Preference Consistency in Listwise LLM-Based Reranking
LLM rerankers exhibit position bias at the pairwise, global, and output levels, and these consistency failures can worsen even when accuracy and exposure metrics improve.
-
OptiSeq: Ordering Examples On-The-Fly for In-Context Learning
OptiSeq selects the in-context example ordering whose output gets the highest zero-shot log-likelihood, improving few-shot accuracy by up to 10.5 points in tests on API sequencing and classification.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.