cs.CLJun 1, 2026

Training Prompt Matters: State-Adaptive Optimization for Robust Fine-Tuning

Authors: Wenhang ShiYiren ChenShuqing BianZhe ZhaoJinhao DongPengfei HuWei LuXiaoyong Du

Abstract

While prompt engineering is instrumental in maximizing the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) during inference, the role of prompts during training remains critically underexplored. Prevailing fine-tuning paradigms typically treat training prompts as mere surface forms, assuming that semantically equivalent instructions yield identical learning outcomes. However, we reveal that this equivalence is deceptive: while paraphrased prompts often lead to comparable in-task performance, they induce drastically different cross-task impacts regarding catastrophic forgetting and generalization. Crucially, these impacts are positively correlated across tasks, indicating the existence of superior prompts that consistently yield better performance. Furthermore, we discover that these superior prompts can be robustly identified by task loss prior to learning. Leveraging these insights, we introduce State-Adaptive Prompt Optimization (SAPO), a lightweight yet effective training strategy that shifts task formulation from a static input to a dynamic, state-adaptive variable. Comprehensive experiments on diverse benchmarks confirm its effectiveness, which significantly mitigates forgetting while improving generalization, achieving substantial performance gains over state-of-the-art methods. These results provide insights into how training prompts shape learning dynamics and offer a practical recipe for robust fine-tuning. Our code is available at https://github.com/Eric8932/SAPO.

Explore similar work

May 20, 2026cs.CL

Reflective Prompt Tuning through Language Model Function-Calling

Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly capable of following instructions and complex reasoning, making prompting a flexible interface for adapting models without parameter updates. Yet prompt design remains labor-intensive and highly sensitive to formatting, phrasing, and instruction order, motivating automated prompt optimization methods that reduce manual effort while preserving inference-time flexibility. However, existing methods often search over prompt candidates or use fixed critique-refine pipelines driven by individual examples or small batches, limiting their ability to capture systematic error patterns and make targeted edits grounded in failure history. We propose Reflective Prompt Tuning (RPT), a framework that uses LLM function calling to simulate the iterative workflow of human prompt engineers. An LLM optimizer calls a diagnostic function that evaluates the target model over an entire optimization set, summarizes recurring failure modes, and returns a structured diagnostic report. The optimizer uses this report, together with an accumulated memory of prior reports, to revise the prompt for the next iteration. RPT further supports confidence-aware optimization by using calibration signals in diagnostic feedback and final prompt selection. Across three reasoning tasks, RPT improves over initial prompts by up to 12.9 points, remains competitive with state of the art, and improves confidence calibration. Our analyses show that RPT is especially effective on multi-hop and mathematical reasoning, producing targeted prompt revisions that align with diagnosed failure patterns and lead to gains in task performance and calibration.
Farima Fatahi Bayat, Moin Aminnaseri, Pouya Pezeshkpour +1
Jun 23, 2026cs.AI

Matching Tasks to Objectives: Fine-Tuning and Prompt-Tuning Strategies for Encoder-Decoder Pre-trained Language Models

Prompt-based learning has emerged as a dominant paradigm in natural language processing. This study explores the impact of diverse pre-training objectives on the performance of encoder-decoder pre-trained language models across generation and question answering tasks, with a focus on commonsense knowledge retrieval and completion. We highlight the benefits of incorporating multiple objectives during both pre-training and fine-tuning stages. We introduce the Match Task to Objective (MTO) framework and methods for determining the appropriate objective for a given task. This framework offers automated methods to prepare task-related data for adaptation through unsupervised training, based on the identified objective. In the fine-tuning stage, we design novel templates that align with the objectives of the pre-training and adaptation stages. When aligned with task requirements, these strategies can achieve a performance gain of over 120% compared to conventional methods in few-shot settings. They significantly outperform related works in few-shot settings and exceed the baseline even in full-dataset scenarios. Furthermore, we extend this approach to include prompt-tuning methodologies, providing guidance for more effective soft prompt engineering and optimization. Our strategies significantly enhance prompt-tuning performance as well. These insights hold substantial value, precisely guiding the selection and optimization of models customized for specific tasks. Code is available at https://github.com/puraminy/MTO/
Ahmad Pouramini, Hesham Faili
Sep 1, 2026cs.AI

Prompt-Robust Language Models: Which Training Strategies Work?

Despite their strong performance, large language models remain highly sensitive to prompt formulation. Prior work addresses this through refined data construction or through dedicated robustness objectives. We reproduce and compare these strategies under controlled conditions, and measure how effective they are in addressing models' prompt sensitivity. We find the current robustness fine-tuning methods improve over standard fine-tuning and in-context learning, but the best-to-worst prompt gap remains as high as 40-57% of performance. Moreover, the recent robustness-enhancing methods we test - CoIN for contrastive alignment and PPCL for consistency regularization - often fail to outperform the simplest data construction strategy: training on one template per batch. Our diagnostics explain these results. The auxiliary objectives move the quantity they penalize, but do not generalize beyond it. Additionally, data construction strategies differ due to the conflicting signs of per-template gradients on 57-64% of parameters. Thus, batches that mix formulations force the optimizer to reconcile competing updates instead of finding a shared, prompt-agnostic one.
Frederic Sadrieh, Michal Štefánik