Did You Read the Instructions? Rethinking the Effectiveness of Task Definitions in Instruction Learning
Fan Yin, Jesse Vig, Philippe Laban, Shafiq Joty, Caiming Xiong, Chien-Sheng Wu
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance in following natural language instructions to solve unseen tasks. However, it remains unclear whether models truly understand task definitions and whether the human-written definitions are optimal. In this paper, we systematically study the role of task definitions in instruction learning. We first conduct an ablation analysis informed by human annotations to understand which parts of a task definition are most important, and find that model performance only drops substantially when removing contents describing the task output, in particular label information. Next, we propose an automatic algorithm to compress task definitions to a minimal supporting set of tokens, and find that 60% of tokens can be removed while maintaining or even improving model performance. Based on these results, we propose two strategies to help models better leverage task instructions: (1) providing only key information for tasks in a common structured format, and (2) adding a meta-tuning stage to help the model better understand the definitions. With these two strategies, we achieve a 4.2 Rouge-L improvement over 119 unseen test tasks.
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.
Cited by top-tier papers18
- RECOMP: Improving Retrieval-Augmented LMs with Context Compression and Selective AugmentationFangyuan Xu, Weijia Shi, Eunsol ChoiICLR 2024 · 260 citations
- In-context Vectors: Making In Context Learning More Effective and Controllable Through Latent Space SteeringSheng Liu, Haotian Ye, Lei Xing, James Y. ZouICML 2024 · 244 citations
- PromptAgent: Strategic Planning with Language Models Enables Expert-level Prompt OptimizationXinyuan Wang, Chenxi Li, Zhen Wang, Fan Bai et al.ICLR 2024 · 226 citations
- Batch Calibration: Rethinking Calibration for In-Context Learning and Prompt EngineeringHan Zhou, Xingchen Wan, Lev Proleev, Diana Mincu et al.ICLR 2024 · 90 citations
- Dynosaur: A Dynamic Growth Paradigm for Instruction-Tuning Data CurationDa Yin, Xiao Liu, Fan Yin, Ming Zhong et al.EMNLP 2023 · 17 citations
Builds on13
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task GeneralizationVictor Sanh, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, Stephen H. Bach et al.ICLR 2022 · 1,976 citations
- Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-shot Performance of Language ModelsZihao Zhao, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Dan Klein et al.ICML 2021 · 1,843 citations
- BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and ComprehensionMike Lewis, Yinhan Liu, Naman Goyal, Marjan Ghazvininejad et al.ACL 2020 · 1,224 citations
Related papers
- AmbigNLG: Addressing Task Ambiguity in Instruction for NLGAyana Niwa, Hayate IsoEMNLP 2024 · 2 citations
- Can Large Language Models Understand Real-World Complex Instructions?Qianyu He, Jie Zeng, Wenhao Huang, Lina Chen et al.AAAI 2024 · 99 citations
- Instruction Induction: From Few Examples to Natural Language Task DescriptionsOr Honovich, Uri Shaham, Samuel R. Bowman, Omer LevyACL 2023 · 48 citations
- BRIEF: Bi-level Coreset Selection for Efficient Instruction Tuning in LLMsChaoyuan Shen, Chi Zhang, Chengliang Chai, Jiacheng Wang et al.VLDB 2026 · 2 citations
- Prompt-MII: Meta-Learning Instruction Induction for LLMsEmily Xiao, Yixiao Zeng, Ada Chen, Chin-Jou Li et al.ICLR 2026 · 9 citations
