Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Auto-ICL: In-Context Learning without Human Supervision

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 2311.09263 v3 pith:QXUEZYYK submitted 2023-11-15 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

Auto-ICL: In-Context Learning without Human Supervision

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL
keywords in-contextlearningcontextcontextsmethodsexamplesexistinghumans
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

With in-context learning ability, the performance of large language models can be significantly boosted when provided with appropriate context. However, existing in-context learning methods mainly rely on human-provided contexts, such as labeled examples and explicit instructions. Writing context by humans is labor-intensive on various tasks and limits the model to tasks manageable by humans. To overcome these limitations, we propose Automatic In-Context Learning framework that enables the model to autonomously generate examples and instructions for problem-solving. With experiments across various models and datasets, results show that model-generated contexts outperform human-annotated contexts, including Few-Shot and Few-Shot-CoT methods, and surpass existing self-generated context methods like Zero-CoT and Auto-CoT.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Learning to Select Visual In-Context Demonstrations

    cs.LG 2026-03 reject novelty 5.0

    A Dueling-DQN agent selects visual in-context demonstrations and outperforms kNN retrieval on objective regression benchmarks but not on subjective preference tasks, per the paper's main table.