SCAR: Data Selection via Style Consistency-Aware Response Ranking for Efficient Instruction-Tuning of Large Language Models
Zhuang Li, Yuncheng Hua, Thuy-Trang Vu, Haolan Zhan, Lizhen Qu, Gholamreza Haffari
Abstract
Recent studies emphasize that manually ensuring a consistent response style and maintaining high data quality in training sets can significantly improve the performance of finetuned Large Language Models (LLMs) while reducing the number of training examples needed. However, the precise definition of style and the relationship between style, data quality, and LLM performance remains unclear. This research identifies two key stylistic elements in responses: linguistic form and instructional surprisal. We find that, among training data of comparable quality, higher consistency in these response elements leads to better LLM performance. Inspired by this, we introduce Style Consistency-Aware Response Ranking (SCAR), which automatically prioritizes instruction-response pairs in the training set based on their response stylistic consistency. By selecting the most style-consistent examples, using only 0.7% of the full dataset in the best case, the fine-tuned LLMs can match or even surpass the performance of models trained on the entire dataset in coding and open-ended question-answering benchmarks. Code and data are available at https://github.com/ zhuang-li/SCAR .
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 74d6cc31-1f48-4e8f-aaf0-edfcbc36a54bCited by top-tier papers4
- Where Did This Sentence Come From? Tracing Provenance in LLM Reasoning DistillationKaiyuan Liu, Shaotian Yan, Rui Miao, Bing Wang et al.ICLR 2026 · 7 citations
- How to Fine-Tune a Reasoning Model? A Teacher–Student Cooperation Framework to Synthesize Student-Consistent SFT DataZixian Huang, Kaichen Yang, Xu Huang, Feiyang Hao et al.ICML 2026 · 5 citations
- Instruction Data Selection via Answer DivergenceBo Li, Mingda Wang, Shikun Zhang, Wei YeACL 2026 · 4 citations
- What Makes Good Instruction-Tuning Data? An In-Context Learning PerspectiveGuangzeng Han, Xiaolei HuangACL 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on16
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Finetuned Language Models are Zero-Shot LearnersJason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu et al.ICLR 2022 · 4,966 citations
- TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human FalsehoodsStephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, Owain EvansACL 2022 · 3,228 citations
- Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task GeneralizationVictor Sanh, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, Stephen H. Bach et al.ICLR 2022 · 1,976 citations
- LIMA: Less Is More for AlignmentChunting Zhou, Pengfei Liu, Puxin Xu, Srinivasan Iyer et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 1,486 citations
Related papers
- SEAL: Safety-enhanced Aligned LLM Fine-tuning via Bilevel Data SelectionHan Shen, Pin-Yu Chen, Payel Das, Tianyi ChenICLR 2025
- I Learn Better If You Speak My Language: Understanding the Superior Performance of Fine-Tuning Large Language Models with LLM-Generated ResponsesXuan Ren, Biao Wu, Lingqiao LiuEMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
- The Unlocking Spell on Base LLMs: Rethinking Alignment via In-Context LearningBill Yuchen Lin, Abhilasha Ravichander, Ximing Lu, Nouha Dziri et al.ICLR 2024 · 299 citations
- Beyond Functional Correctness: Investigating Coding Style Inconsistencies in Large Language ModelsYanlin Wang, Tianyue Jiang, Mingwei Liu, Jiachi Chen et al.FSE 2025 · 6 citations
- RCScore: Quantifying Response Consistency in Large Language ModelsDongjun Jang, Youngchae Ahn, Hyopil ShinEMNLP 2025
