Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
119 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Fine-Tuning and Prompt Optimization: Two Great Steps that Work Better Together (2407.10930v2)

Published 15 Jul 2024 in cs.CL, cs.AI, and cs.LG

Abstract: NLP systems are increasingly taking the form of sophisticated modular pipelines, e.g., Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), where each module may involve a distinct LLM (LM) and an associated prompt template. These compound systems often lack intermediate labels or gradient flow to optimize each module, making their end-to-end optimization challenging. Here we seek strategies to optimize both the module-level LM weights and the associated prompt templates of such systems to maximize a downstream task metric. We propose for the first time combining the weight and prompt optimization strategies to optimize a modular LM pipeline by alternating between the two to get the same LM to teach itself. In experiments with multi-hop QA, mathematical reasoning, and feature-based classification using mistral-7b, llama-2-7b, and llama-3-8b, these BetterTogether strategies optimizing the weights and prompts of a pipeline together outperform directly optimizing weights alone and prompts alone by up to 60% and 6%, respectively, on average across LMs and tasks. BetterTogether optimizer is released in DSPy at http://dspy.ai

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (3)
  1. Dilara Soylu (6 papers)
  2. Christopher Potts (113 papers)
  3. Omar Khattab (34 papers)
Citations (5)

Summary

Fine-Tuning and Prompt Optimization: Two Great Steps that Work Better Together

Introduction

The paper "Fine-Tuning and Prompt Optimization: Two Great Steps that Work Better Together" explores the intricate dynamics between fine-tuning and prompt optimization within multi-stage NLP pipelines that leverage multiple LLMs (LMs). Traditional NLP models often rely on either fine-tuning or prompt optimization to enhance model performance. This paper argues that combining these two strategies can yield superior results, particularly when applied iteratively.

Methodology

The authors frame the problem as jointly optimizing the underlying LM weights and prompts. This is especially challenging due to the absence of gold labels for intermediate stages in the pipeline. To address this, the paper evaluates approximate optimization strategies using a consistent bootstrapping methodology to generate training labels across all pipeline stages. The primary focus is on the BetterTogether algorithm, which alternates between prompt optimization and weight fine-tuning steps.

The methodology is tested across three tasks to ensure generalizability:

  1. Multi-hop Question Answering (QA) using the HotPotQA dataset.
  2. Mathematical reasoning using GSM8K.
  3. Feature-based classification using the Iris dataset.

Three distinct LMs are utilized:

  • mistral-7b-instruct-v0.2
  • llama-2-7b-chat
  • llama-3-8b-instruct

Results

The experimental evaluation provides robust evidence supporting the benefits of combining prompt optimization with weight fine-tuning. Performance across tasks and LMs highlights significant improvements:

  • HotPotQA: Accuracy gains ranged from 5% to 78%,
  • GSM8K: Gains between 2.5% to 10%,
  • Iris: Mixed results with decreases up to -5.9% to gains of 136%.

The results indicate that, on average, strategies that involve optimizing both prompts and weights outperform those that optimize either component in isolation. For example, for HotPotQA and the mistral-7b-instruct-v0.2 model, the accuracy improvement was as significant as 17.2% to 37.6% when alternating between prompt and weight optimization.

Discussion

This paper's findings reinforce the necessity of integrating both prompt and weight optimizations, especially in the context of NLP pipelines. This dual optimization framework is shown to yield substantial improvements across various tasks, hinting at a more universal applicability. Notably, the benefits are observed despite the inherent complexity and lack of intermediate labels in the pipeline.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

Theoretical Implications:

  • This research underscores the complexity of language understanding tasks that involve multiple stages. The alternating optimization approach aligns with emerging theories on modular and compositional learning, suggesting that breaking tasks into more granular sub-tasks can yield better learning outcomes when guided by strategic optimization.
  • The results challenge the conventional wisdom that fine-tuning should be the primary method for improving LM performance, highlighting the crucial role of prompt engineering as a complementary strategy.

Practical Implications:

  • Practitioners can leverage the BetterTogether algorithm to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of multi-stage NLP systems. By alternating between prompt optimization and weight fine-tuning, systems can achieve higher performance with potentially fewer computational resources.
  • The release of the new optimizers in DSPy (http://dspy.ai) promises to facilitate the adoption of these methodologies in broader applications, hastening development cycles and improving the robustness of deployed NLP systems.

Future Developments in AI

The insights garnered from this paper pave the way for several intriguing future directions:

  1. Broader Task Applicability: Future studies should explore the efficacy of the alternating optimization approach across a wider array of NLP tasks, potentially including tasks that require higher-order reasoning or those in low-resource languages.
  2. Fine-Tuning Variations: Investigations into different fine-tuning strategies beyond LoRA could uncover optimized pathways that minimize the necessity for iterative prompt optimization.
  3. Interpretable ML: Understanding why the combination outperforms individual strategies could drive advancements in interpretable machine learning, providing clearer frameworks for the joint optimization of modular NLP systems.

Conclusion

The proposed approach of alternating between fine-tuning and prompt optimization proves to be substantially beneficial in multi-stage NLP pipelines. Empirical results substantiate that a coordinated strategy leveraging both methods can significantly outperform either in isolation. With compelling numerical results across diverse tasks and LLMs, this research is poised to influence the design and optimization of future NLP systems, promoting a more nuanced consideration of prompt engineering as an indispensable tool in the NLP optimization toolkit.