RiOT: Efficient Prompt Refinement with Residual Optimization Tree
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have highlighted their potential across a variety of tasks, but their performance still heavily relies on the design of effective prompts. Existing methods for automatic prompt optimization face two challenges: lack of diversity, limiting the exploration of valuable and innovative directions and semantic drift, where optimizations for one task can degrade performance in others. To address these issues, we propose Residual Optimization Tree (RiOT), a novel framework for automatic prompt optimization. RiOT iteratively refines prompts through text gradients, generating multiple semantically diverse candidates at each step, and selects the best prompt using perplexity. Additionally, RiOT incorporates the text residual connection to mitigate semantic drift by selectively retaining beneficial content across optimization iterations. A tree structure efficiently manages the optimization process, ensuring scalability and flexibility. Extensive experiments across five benchmarks, covering commonsense, mathematical, logical, temporal, and semantic reasoning, demonstrate that RiOT outperforms both previous prompt optimization methods and manual prompting.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jun 2025.
Builds on
28 of 51 references.
References · 28
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2025Qwen2.5-VL Technical Reportcited by 5,587
- 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,787
- 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,915
- 2021The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuningcited by 3,795
- 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,224
- 2016Learning without Forgettingcited by 2,496
16 more
- 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,998
- 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,807
- 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
- 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,462
- 2020Making Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 1,256
- 2021Did Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning Strategiescited by 743
- 2023Automatic Prompt Optimization with "Gradient Descent" and Beam Searchcited by 653
- 2021Prompt Programming for Large Language Models: Beyond the Few-Shot Paradigmcited by 606
- 2021Learning How to Ask: Querying LMs with Mixtures of Soft Promptscited by 377
- 2022RLPrompt: Optimizing Discrete Text Prompts with Reinforcement Learningcited by 366
- 2023Hard Prompts Made Easy: Gradient-Based Discrete Optimization for Prompt Tuning and Discoverycited by 336
- 2023ReConcile: Round-Table Conference Improves Reasoning via Consensus among Diverse LLMscited by 309
- 2018Continuous Learning in Single-Incremental-Task Scenarioscited by 109
- 2024Analyzing and Reducing Catastrophic Forgetting in Parameter Efficient Tuningcited by 60
- 2022Toward Human Readable Prompt Tuning: Kubrick's The Shining is a good movie, and a good prompt too?cited by 49
- 2024Prompt Design and Engineering: Introduction and Advanced Methodscited by 45
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.