BRIEF: Bi-level Coreset Selection for Efficient Instruction Tuning in LLMs
Chaoyuan Shen, Chi Zhang, Chengliang Chai, Jiacheng Wang, Jia Yuan, Yuping Wang, Ye Yuan, Guoren Wang, Lei Cao
Abstract
Instruction tuning is a key step in adapting large language models (LLMs) to effectively understand and follow human instructions. It enables LLMs to transform general knowledge into task-specific responses that align with user intent. Although many high-quality instruction tuning datasets have been released, efficiently utilizing these data sources during supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is important, as training on the full high-quality corpus can be computationally expensive. To address this inefficiency, we explore whether a compact, high-quality subset of instruction data can achieve comparable performance to full-dataset SFT, thereby reducing training cost without sacrificing effectiveness. To this end, this work proposes to select such a subset (a.k.a., coreset) of instruction examples that maintains comparable downstream performance while improving training efficiency. The key idea is inspired by our discovered decomposition that in instruction tuning, the training loss can be decomposed into two components that effectively quantify the contribution of an instruction to the two fundamental capabilities of LLMs, namely knowledge-related capability and instruction following capability. We then revisit the objective of the classical coreset approaches to balance the two capabilities when selecting instruction examples. Based on a bi-level formulation and a composite gradient distance that makes the objective submodular, we design an effective algorithm to achieve a bounded approximation error. Experiments on 4 datasets across 9 downstream tasks demonstrate that BRIEF reduces computational costs by 3× while improving accuracy by 5% on Llama-3.1-8B, Qwen3-4B and Mistral-Nemo-12B.
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 4a5ae1de-edee-4373-8ec6-ed68f925f484Builds on28
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language ModelsEdward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu et al.ICLR 2022 · 18,833 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- The Flan Collection: Designing Data and Methods for Effective Instruction TuningShayne Longpre, Le Hou, Tu Vu, Albert Webson et al.ICML 2023 · 908 citations
- Coresets for Data-efficient Training of Machine Learning ModelsBaharan Mirzasoleiman, Jeff A. Bilmes, Jure LeskovecICML 2020 · 494 citations
Related papers
- TRIM: Token-wise Attention-Derived Saliency for Data-Efficient Instruction TuningManish Nagaraj, Sakshi Choudhary, Utkarsh Saxena, Deepak Ravikumar et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
- LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction TuningMengzhou Xia, Sadhika Malladi, Suchin Gururangan, Sanjeev Arora et al.ICML 2024 · 460 citations
- DELIFT: Data Efficient Language model Instruction Fine-TuningIshika Agarwal, Krishnateja Killamsetty, Lucian Popa, Marina DanilevskyICLR 2025
- A Critical Look at Targeted Instruction Selection: Disentangling What Matters (and What Doesn’t)Nihal Nayak, Paula Rodriguez-Diaz, Neha Hulkund, Sara Beery et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
- What Makes Good Data for Alignment? A Comprehensive Study of Automatic Data Selection in Instruction TuningWei Liu, Weihao Zeng, Keqing He, Yong Jiang et al.ICLR 2024 · 369 citations
