Why Supervised Fine-Tuning Fails to Learn: A Systematic Study of Incomplete Learning in Large Language Models
Chao Xue, Yao Wang, Mengqiao Liu, Di Liang, Xingsheng Han, Peiyang Liu, Xianjie Wu, Chenyao Lu, Lei Jiang, Yu Lu, Haibo Shi, Shuang Liang
Abstract
Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) is the standard approach for adapting large language models (LLMs) to downstream tasks. However, we observe a persistent failure mode: even after convergence, models often fail to correctly reproduce a subset of their own supervised training data. We refer to this behavior as the Incomplete Learning Phenomenon(ILP). This paper presents the first systematic study of ILP in LLM fine-tuning. We formalize ILP as post-training failure to internalize supervised instances and demonstrate its prevalence across multiple model families, domains, and datasets. Through controlled analyses, we identify five recurrent sources of incomplete learning: (1) missing prerequisite knowledge in the pre-trained model, (2) conflicts between SFT supervision and pre-training knowledge, (3) internal inconsistencies within SFT data, (4) left-side forgetting during sequential fine-tuning, and (5) insufficient optimization for rare or complex patterns. We introduce a diagnostic-first framework that maps unlearned samples to these causes using observable training and inference signals, and study several targeted mitigation strategies as causal interventions. Experiments on Qwen, LLaMA, and OLMo2 show that incomplete learning is widespread and heterogeneous, and that improvements in aggregate metrics can mask persistent unlearned subsets. The findings highlight the need for fine-grained diagnosis of what supervised fine-tuning fails to learn, and why.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 214ca558-1ae8-474d-9216-ae879ad89256Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on22
- Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task GeneralizationVictor Sanh, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, Stephen H. Bach et al.ICLR 2022 · 1,976 citations
- Scaling Laws for Reward Model OveroptimizationLeo Gao, John Schulman, Jacob HiltonICML 2023 · 963 citations
- WizardCoder: Empowering Code Large Language Models with Evol-InstructZiyang Luo, Can Xu, Pu Zhao, Qingfeng Sun et al.ICLR 2024 · 945 citations
- R-Drop: Regularized Dropout for Neural NetworksXiaobo Liang, Lijun Wu, Juntao Li, Yue Wang et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 610 citations
- MAmmoTH: Building Math Generalist Models through Hybrid Instruction TuningXiang Yue, Xingwei Qu, Ge Zhang, Yao Fu et al.ICLR 2024 · 558 citations
Related papers
- Retaining by Doing: The Role of On-Policy Data in Mitigating ForgettingHoward Chen, Noam Razin, Karthik Narasimhan, Danqi ChenICML 2026
- Investigating and Mitigating Catastrophic Forgetting in Medical Knowledge Injection through Internal Knowledge Augmentation LearningYuxuan Zhou, Xien Liu, Xiao Zhang, Chen Ning et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 5 citations
- Analyzing the Effects of Supervised Fine-Tuning on Model Knowledge from Token and Parameter LevelsJunjie Ye, Yuming Yang, Yang Nan, Shuo Li et al.EMNLP 2025
- On the Loss of Context Awareness in General Instruction Fine-tuningYihan Wang, Andrew Bai, Nanyun Peng, Cho-Jui HsiehNeurIPS 2025 · 11 citations
- Demystifying Language Model Forgetting with Low-rank Example AssociationsXisen Jin, Xiang RenNeurIPS 2025 · 9 citations
