Effectiveness of Data Augmentation for Parameter Efficient Tuning with Limited Data
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent work has demonstrated that using parameter efficient tuning techniques such as prefix tuning (or P-tuning) on pretrained language models can yield performance that is comparable or superior to fine-tuning while dramatically reducing trainable parameters. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of such methods under the context of data augmentation, a common strategy to improve learning under low data regimes, has not been fully explored. In this paper, we examine the effectiveness of several popular task-agnostic data augmentation techniques, i.e., EDA, Back Translation, and Mixup, when using two general parameter efficient tuning methods, P-tuning v2 and LoRA, under data scarcity. We show that data augmentation can be used to boost the performance of P-tuning and LoRA models, but the effectiveness of each technique varies and certain methods can lead to a notable degradation in performance, particularly when using larger models and on harder tasks. We further analyze the sentence representations of P-tuning compared to fine-tuning to help understand the above behaviour, and reveal how P-tuning generally presents a more limited ability to separate the sentence embeddings from different classes of augmented data. In addition, it displays poorer performance on heavily altered data. However, we demonstrate that by adding a simple contrastive loss function it can help mitigate such issues for prefix tuning, resulting in sizable improvements to augmented data performance.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Mar 2023.
Builds on
24 of 42 references.
References · 24
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,777
- 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,183
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,915
- 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,729
- 2020Big Bird: Transformers for Longer Sequencescited by 1,684
- 2021Towards a Unified View of Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learningcited by 872
- 2019EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Taskscited by 807
- 2015Improving Neural Machine Translation Models with Monolingual Datacited by 788
12 more
- 2021P-Tuning v2: Prompt Tuning Can Be Comparable to Fine-tuning Universally Across Scales and Taskscited by 689
- 2020AdapterHub: A Framework for Adapting Transformerscited by 444
- 2021A Survey of Data Augmentation Approaches for NLPcited by 409
- 2021Learning How to Ask: Querying LMs with Mixtures of Soft Promptscited by 377
- 2020BAE: BERT-based Adversarial Examples for Text Classificationcited by 316
- 2020On the Stability of Fine-tuning BERT: Misconceptions, Explanations, and Strong Baselinescited by 255
- 2019Not Enough Data? Deep Learning to the Rescue!cited by 175
- 2018MixUp as Locally Linear Out-Of-Manifold Regularizationcited by 158
- 2020The Tatoeba Translation Challenge -- Realistic Data Sets for Low Resource and Multilingual MTcited by 128
- 2019Augmenting Data with Mixup for Sentence Classification: An Empirical Studycited by 125
- 2020Improving Zero and Few-Shot Abstractive Summarization with Intermediate Fine-tuning and Data Augmentationcited by 53
- 2020How Effective is Task-Agnostic Data Augmentation for Pretrained Transformers?cited by 41
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.
1 paper.