Hyperparameter Optimization for Large Language Model Instruction-Tuning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fine-tuning of Large Language Models (LLMs) has enabled them to recently achieve milestones in natural language processing applications. The emergence of ever larger LLMs has paved the way for more efficient fine-tuning methods. Among these, the Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) method keeps most of the weights of the pre-trained LLM frozen while introducing a low-rank decomposition of the weight matrix, enabling the tuning of only a very small proportion of the network. The performance on downstream tasks of models fine-tuned with LoRA heavily relies on a set of hyperparameters including the rank of the decomposition. In this work, we investigate the choice of these hyperparameters through two main blackbox optimization (BBO) techniques. We examine the whole pipeline of performing fine-tuning and validation on a pre-trained LLM as a blackbox and efficiently explore the space of hyperparameters with the \nomad algorithm, achieving a boost in performance and human alignment of the tuned model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".