APE: Selective Fine-tuning with Acceptance Criteria for Language Model Adaptation

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated excellent performance in general language understanding, generation and other tasks. However, when fine-tuning for specific domain tasks, the general knowledge accumulated in the pre-training phase is often partially overwritten or forgotten due to parameter updates, which severely limits the generalization ability and transferability of LLMs. Traditional fine-tuning strategies mostly train on the entire parameter space, ignoring the heterogeneity of model parameters, that is, some parameters are extremely important for general tasks, while other parameters are more sensitive to specific tasks. To alleviate the above problems, this paper innovatively proposes a parameter element importance evaluation method, which divides parameters into "core parameters" and "non-core parameters" by distinguishing the importance of parameters for general language ability tasks and specific domain tasks, and fixes the core parameters during fine-tuning, and only fine-tunes the non-core parameters. Extensive experiments on scientific, medical and physical tasks using GPT-J and LLaMA-3 show that our method can mitigate catastrophic forgetting while enhancing the adaptability of the model.

Large language models (LLMs) remain expensive to fine-tune because full-parameter updates require substantial memory, compute, and per-task storage. We study whether saliency signals originally developed for pruning can be reused to choose where a model should adapt. We propose Super, a sparse parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) method that fixes a small trainable support using a Wanda-style activation-weighted magnitude score [Sun et al., 2023] computed from a calibration pass. We then introduce Supra, a hybrid adapter that combines this sparse update with LoRA while preserving a matched trainable-parameter budget through a simple budget-splitting rule. In single-seed Math17K arithmetic experiments on Llama-3.2-1B and Meta-Llama-3-8B, the best Super/Supra variants achieve the highest average accuracy among the tested schedule-selected adapter configurations. We also include a PaFi-style magnitude-only support as a closest training-free sparse baseline and find that low-score supports under both magnitude and Wanda-style orderings can be effective. These results suggest that simple pruning-inspired orderings can provide useful fixed sparse supports for PEFT, especially when combined with low-rank adapters.

Recent literature on fine-tuning Large Language Models highlights a fundamental debate. While Full Fine-Tuning (FFT) provides greater representational plasticity, Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) can match or surpass FFT performance while constraining updates to a low-rank space and potentially benefiting from additional regularization. Through empirical evaluation across diverse tasks (SQL, Medical QA, and Counterfactual Knowledge) and varying language models (Gemma-3-1B, Qwen2.5-1.5B, and Qwen2.5-3B), we observe both trends and find that the better static architecture depends on the task and model. Spectral and truncation analyses further show that endpoint compressibility alone does not explain these task differences, suggesting task-score sensitivity and constrained optimization trajectories as possible explanations. To address this challenge, we propose a Mixture of LoRA and Full (MoLF) Fine-Tuning, a unified framework that enables continuous navigation between both training regimes. MoLF dynamically routes updates between FFT and LoRA at the optimizer level to ensure that exact gradient signals are available to both experts throughout training, while only selected experts update their weights. For memory-constrained environments, we also introduce MoLF-Efficient, which freezes base weights and only routes updates among a pair of LoRA experts of potentially varying rank. Our evaluations show that MoLF either improves on or stays within $1.5$ percentage points of the better of FFT and LoRA across the nine tested settings, while MoLF-Efficient outperforms both AdaLoRA and AdaMix in eight of nine settings, with gains over the stronger baseline of up to $11.70$ percentage points on Fact, $3.13$ on Med, and $2.98$ on SQL.