Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

Instruction Tuning With Loss Over Instructions

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

arxiv 2405.14394 v2 pith:C5ZU7LGC submitted 2024-05-23 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords instructiontuningtrainingalpacaevalbenchmarksdatasetsespeciallyexamples
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Instruction tuning plays a crucial role in shaping the outputs of language models (LMs) to desired styles. In this work, we propose a simple yet effective method, Instruction Modelling (IM), which trains LMs by applying a loss function to the instruction and prompt part rather than solely to the output part. Through experiments across 21 diverse benchmarks, we show that, in many scenarios, IM can effectively improve the LM performance on both NLP tasks (e.g., MMLU, TruthfulQA, and HumanEval) and open-ended generation benchmarks (e.g., MT-Bench and AlpacaEval). Remarkably, in the most advantageous case, IM boosts model performance on AlpacaEval 1.0 by over 100%. We identify two key factors influencing the effectiveness of IM: (1) The ratio between instruction length and output length in the training data; and (2) The number of training examples. We observe that IM is especially beneficial when trained on datasets with lengthy instructions paired with brief outputs, or under the Superficial Alignment Hypothesis (SAH) where a small amount of training examples are used for instruction tuning. Further analysis substantiates our hypothesis that our improvement can be attributed to reduced overfitting to instruction tuning datasets. It is worth noting that we are not proposing \ours as a replacement for current fine-tuning processes. Instead, our work aims to provide practical guidance for instruction tuning LMs, especially in low-resource scenarios.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Fun-tuning: Characterizing the Vulnerability of Proprietary LLMs to Optimization-based Prompt Injection Attacks via the Fine-Tuning Interface

    cs.CR 2025-01 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Attackers can use the loss signal from a remote LLM fine-tuning API to optimize adversarial prefix and suffix tokens, turning existing prompt injections into high-success attacks on closed-weight Gemini models.

  2. Aligned Query Expansion: Efficient Query Expansion for Information Retrieval through LLM Alignment

    cs.IR 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    AQE uses retrieval rank as a preference signal to fine-tune T0 with RSFT and DPO, beating generate-then-filter baselines on four QA datasets.

  3. All-in-One Tuning and Structural Pruning for Domain-Specific LLMs

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ATP jointly searches for pruning decisions and fine-tunes LLaMA models with LoRA in one stage, outperforming two-stage pruning on domain-specific tasks.

  4. Bielik v3 Small: Technical Report

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Bielik v3 is a pair of small Polish LLMs that match larger models on Polish benchmarks, though the evidence lacks error bars and contamination checks.

  5. Xmodel-1.5: An 1B-scale Multilingual LLM

    cs.CL 2024-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Xmodel-1.5, a 1B multilingual LLM with a custom unigram tokenizer, outperforms PolyLM-1.7B on several Thai, Arabic, French, and Chinese benchmarks and includes a new Thai evaluation dataset.

Pith tools