Revisiting Automated Prompting: Are We Actually Doing Better?

Yulin Zhou, Yiren Zhao, Ilia Shumailov, Robert Mullins, Yarin Gal
4/7/2023
cs.CLcs.LG

No official code found. Best implementation: KyraZzz/nlp-prompt-attack (3 stars, MIT, last commit 2023-09-19).

Abstract

Current literature demonstrates that Large Language Models (LLMs) are great few-shot learners, and prompting significantly increases their performance on a range of downstream tasks in a few-shot learning setting. An attempt to automate human-led prompting followed, with some progress achieved. In particular, subsequent work demonstrates automation can outperform fine-tuning in certain K-shot learning scenarios. In this paper, we revisit techniques for automated prompting on six different downstream tasks and a larger range of K-shot learning settings. We find that automated prompting does not consistently outperform simple manual prompts. Our work suggests that, in addition to fine-tuning, manual prompts should be used as a baseline in this line of research.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

MIT
30Shell, PythonOct 7, 20223 years agoMIT

Cite this paper

@article{zhou2023revisiting,
  title  = {Revisiting Automated Prompting: Are We Actually Doing Better?},
  author = {Yulin Zhou and Yiren Zhao and Ilia Shumailov and Robert Mullins and Yarin Gal},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2304.03609},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03609v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2304.03609.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2304.03609)

Discussion