Instruction Following
Overview
Instruction-following research asks whether language models and agents can carry out what users request, including exact formats, multiple constraints, changing requirements, and rules that override other instructions. Researchers test these abilities with automatically checked benchmarks and realistic settings such as long conversations, tool use, coding, speech, and embodied tasks. To improve performance, they use supervised fine-tuning, preference learning and reinforcement learning with verifiable or rubric-based rewards, as well as prompt compilation, model steering, and inference-time checks. Models can handle many simple instructions, but reliability often falls when constraints interact or accumulate, and improving compliance without harming reasoning, task quality, or general capabilities remains a central challenge.
Latest papers
135 papers22 papers in the last four weeks, up 57% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.
Enhancing Instruction Following of LLMs via Activation Steering with Dynamic Rejection
FireBench: Evaluating Instruction Following in Enterprise and API-Driven LLM Applications
IF-RewardBench: Benchmarking Judge Models for Instruction-Following Evaluation
Prompt Sensitivity and Answer Consistency of Small Open-Source Language Models for Clinical Question Answering in Low-Resource Healthcare
DARE-bench: Evaluating Modeling and Instruction Fidelity of LLMs in Data Science
From Leaky Thoughts to Private Reasoning: Controlling What LRMs Say to Themselves
RAIN-Merging: A Gradient-Free Method to Enhance Instruction Following in Large Reasoning Models with Preserved Thinking Format
IndicIFEval: A Benchmark for Verifiable Instruction-Following Evaluation in 14 Indic Languages
LARFT: Closing the Cognition-Action Gap for Length Instruction Following in Large Language Models
Measuring Pragmatic Influence in Large Language Model Instructions
This is urgent'' or As your supervisor'' can shift model behavior without altering task content. We study this effect as pragmatic framing, contextual cues that shape directive interpretation rather than task specification. While prior work exploits such cues for prompt optimization or probes them as security vulnerabilities, pragmatic framing itself has received comparatively little attention as a target of controlled measurement in instruction following. To support its systematic study as a measurable property, we introduce a framework that combines three components: directive-framing decomposition separating framing context from task specification; a taxonomy organizing 400 instantiations of framing into 13 strategies across 4 mechanism clusters; and priority-based measurement that quantifies influence through observable shifts in directive prioritization. Evaluating five open-weight LLMs across different families and scales, we find that pragmatic framing produces systematic shifts in directive prioritization, and the effectiveness ranking of different strategies proves highly consistent across models. This reveals that susceptibility to pragmatic framing is a structured behavioral property of instruction-tuned systems. Measuring this susceptibility is a prerequisite for any deliberate response to it, and this work provides the framework to do so.