Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

Reframing Instructional Prompts to GPTk's Language

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2109.07830 v3 pith:4PLCPMMW submitted 2021-09-16 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

Reframing Instructional Prompts to GPTk's Language

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG
keywords instructionspromptsreframedfew-shotinstructionaltasksacrosseffective
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

What kinds of instructional prompts are easier to follow for Language Models (LMs)? We study this question by conducting extensive empirical analysis that shed light on important features of successful instructional prompts. Specifically, we study several classes of reframing techniques for manual reformulation of prompts into more effective ones. Some examples include decomposing a complex task instruction into multiple simpler tasks or itemizing instructions into sequential steps. Our experiments compare the zero-shot and few-shot performance of LMs prompted with reframed instructions on 12 NLP tasks across 6 categories. Compared with original instructions, our reframed instructions lead to significant improvements across LMs with different sizes. For example, the same reframed prompts boost few-shot performance of GPT3-series and GPT2-series by 12.5% and 6.7% respectively averaged over all tasks. Furthermore, reframed instructions reduce the number of examples required to prompt LMs in the few-shot setting. We hope these empirically-driven techniques will pave the way towards more effective future prompting algorithms.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?

    cs.CL 2022-02 accept novelty 8.0

    Randomly replacing labels in in-context demonstrations barely hurts performance, showing that label space, input distribution, and sequence format drive in-context learning more than ground-truth labels.

  2. DICE: Entropy-Regularized Equilibrium Selection for Stable Multi-Agent LLM Coordination

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    DICE formalizes multi-agent LLM coordination as discounted incomplete-information Markov games and introduces Heterogeneous Quantal Response Equilibrium (HQRE) to achieve unique stable equilibria with bounded regret, ...

  3. TF1-EN-3M: Three Million Synthetic Moral Fables for Training Small, Open Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The authors generate and publicly release the first large-scale open dataset of three million structured moral fables produced by small open language models together with a reproducible LLM-judge evaluation pipeline.

  4. Cross-Task Generalization via Natural Language Crowdsourcing Instructions

    cs.CL 2021-04 conditional novelty 7.0

    Presents the NATURAL INSTRUCTIONS meta-dataset and shows generative pre-trained language models achieve 19% better generalization to unseen tasks when using task instructions.

  5. Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formatting

    cs.CL 2023-10 conditional novelty 6.0

    LLMs are highly sensitive to prompt formatting in few-shot settings, with accuracy varying by up to 76 points across formats; FormatSpread samples formats to report performance intervals without model weights.