Data Difficulty and the Generalization–Extrapolation Tradeoff in LLM Fine-Tuning
Siyuan Liu, Tinghong Chen, Xinghan Li, Yifei Wang, Jingzhao Zhang
Abstract
Data selection during supervised fine-tuning (SFT) can critically change the behavior of large language models (LLMs). Although existing work has studied the effect of selecting data based on heuristics such as perplexity, difficulty, or length, the reported findings are often inconsistent or context-dependent. In this work, we systematically study the role of data difficulty in fine-tuning from both empirical and theoretical perspectives, and find that there is no universally optimal difficulty level; rather, its effectiveness depends on the dataset size. We show that for a fixed data budget, there exists an optimal data difficulty for SFT, and that this optimal difficulty shifts toward harder data as the data budget increases. To explain this phenomenon, we conduct controlled synthetic experiments that reveal a simple underlying mechanism: the interplay between the (in-distribution) generalization gap and the extrapolation gap. We further support this mechanism through a theoretical analysis using PAC-Bayesian generalization bounds. Overall, our results clarify how data size and difficulty jointly affect the trade-off between generalization and extrapolation in SFT, providing guidance for difficulty-based data selection under certain model and data conditions.
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 ca2c4ea8-3ef5-4e06-a45c-2ecaa1c980e2Builds on11
- Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language ModelsAitor Lewkowycz, Anders Andreassen, David Dohan, Ethan Dyer et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 2,039 citations
- LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction TuningMengzhou Xia, Sadhika Malladi, Suchin Gururangan, Sanjeev Arora et al.ICML 2024 · 460 citations
- Task2Vec: Task Embedding for Meta-LearningAlessandro Achille, Michael Lam, Rahul Tewari, Avinash Ravichandran et al.ICCV 2019 · 359 citations
- On the Generalization of SFT: A Reinforcement Learning Perspective with Reward RectificationYongliang Wu, Yizhou Zhou, Ziheng Zhou, Yingzhe Peng et al.ICLR 2026 · 130 citations
- Improving generalization by controlling label-noise information in neural network weightsHrayr Harutyunyan, Kyle Reing, Greg Ver Steeg, Aram GalstyanICML 2020 · 59 citations
Related papers
- Why Does RL Generalize Better Than SFT? A Data-Centric Perspective on VLM Post-TrainingAojun Lu, Tao Feng, Hangjie Yuan, Wei Li et al.CVPR 2026 · 3 citations
- Massive Supervised Fine-tuning Experiments Reveal How Data, Layer, and Training Factors Shape LLM Alignment QualityYuto Harada, Yusuke Yamauchi, Yusuke Oda, Yohei Oseki et al.EMNLP 2025
- Compute-Constrained Data SelectionJunjie Oscar Yin, Alexander M. RushICLR 2025
- The Emperor's New Reasoning: Format Imitation Overshadows Genuine Mathematical Understanding in SFTLinyao Yang, Jian-Tao Huang, Yafei Lu, Zhenhui Jessie Li et al.EMNLP 2025
- ATLANTIS: Weak-to-Strong Learning via Importance SamplingYi Liu, Guoyin Wang, Shicheng Li, Feifan Song et al.ACL 2025
