Prompting Science Report 1: Prompt Engineering is Complicated and Contingent
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This is the first of a series of short reports that seek to help business, education, and policy leaders understand the technical details of working with AI through rigorous testing. In this report, we demonstrate two things: - There is no single standard for measuring whether a Large Language Model (LLM) passes a benchmark, and that choosing a standard has a big impact on how well the LLM does on that benchmark. The standard you choose will depend on your goals for using an LLM in a particular case. - It is hard to know in advance whether a particular prompting approach will help or harm the LLM's ability to answer any particular question. Specifically, we find that sometimes being polite to the LLM helps performance, and sometimes it lowers performance. We also find that constraining the AI's answers helps performance in some cases, though it may lower performance in other cases. Taken together, this suggests that benchmarking AI performance is not one-size-fits-all, and also that particular prompting formulas or approaches, like being polite to the AI, are not universally valuable.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 2 of its 5 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Mar 2025.
Builds on
2 of 5 references.
References · 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 3.
8 papers.
- 2025Beyond "Hallucinations": A Framework for Stable Human-AI Reasoningcited by 3
- 2025Prompting as Scientific Inquirycited by 2
- 2025Prompting Science Report 3: I'll pay you or I'll kill you -- but will you care?cited by 1
- 2025Instance-level Randomization: Toward More Stable LLM Evaluationscited by 1
- 2025Prompting Science Report 4: Playing Pretend: Expert Personas Don't Improve Factual Accuracycited by 1
- 2026Ghost Framing Theory: Exploring the role of generative AI in new venture rhetorical legitimationcited by 0
- 2026Human-in-the-Loop Control of Objective Drift in LLM-Assisted Computer Science Educationcited by 0
- 2026Understanding Tone-Dependent Inference Cost in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Understanding Tone-Dependent Inference Cost in Large Language Models27 Jul 2026
- 2026Human-in-the-Loop Control of Objective Drift in LLM-Assisted Computer Science Education31 Mar 2026
- 2026Ghost Framing Theory: Exploring the role of generative AI in new venture rhetorical legitimation11 Mar 2026
- 2025Prompting Science Report 4: Playing Pretend: Expert Personas Don't Improve Factual Accuracy5 Dec 2025
- 2025Beyond "Hallucinations": A Framework for Stable Human-AI Reasoning16 Oct 2025
- 2025Instance-level Randomization: Toward More Stable LLM Evaluations16 Sep 2025
- 2025Prompting Science Report 3: I'll pay you or I'll kill you -- but will you care?1 Aug 2025
- 2025Prompting as Scientific Inquiry30 Jun 2025