Compress to Impress: Efficient LLM Adaptation Using a Single Gradient Step on 100 Samples
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recently, Sharma et al. suggested a method called Layer-SElective-Rank reduction (LASER) which demonstrated that pruning high-order components of carefully chosen LLM's weight matrices can boost downstream accuracy -- without any gradient-based fine-tuning. Yet LASER's exhaustive, per-matrix search (each requiring full-dataset forward passes) makes it impractical for rapid deployment. We demonstrate that this overhead can be removed and find that: (i) Only a small, carefully chosen subset of matrices needs to be inspected -- eliminating the layer-by-layer sweep, (ii) The gradient of each matrix's singular values pinpoints which matrices merit reduction, (iii) Increasing the factorization search space by allowing matrices rows to cluster around multiple subspaces and then decomposing each cluster separately further reduces overfitting on the original training data and further lifts accuracy by up to 24.6 percentage points, and finally, (iv) we discover that evaluating on just 100 samples rather than the full training data -- both for computing the indicative gradients and for measuring the final accuracy -- suffices to further reduce the search time; we explain that as adaptation to downstream tasks is dominated by prompting style, not dataset size. As a result, we show that combining these findings yields a fast and robust adaptation algorithm for downstream tasks. Overall, with a single gradient step on 100 examples and a quick scan of the top candidate layers and factorization techniques, we can adapt LLMs to new datasets -- entirely without fine-tuning.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 76 of its 102 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Oct 2025.
Builds on
76 of 102 references.
References · 76
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
- 2019Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learning for NLPcited by 4,236
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,915
- 2021The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuningcited by 3,795
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
38 more
- 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,754
- 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 3,024
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,724
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2015Deep Compression: Compressing Deep Neural Networks with Pruning, Trained Quantization and Huffman Codingcited by 2,329
- 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,847
- 2021Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task Generalizationcited by 1,470
- 2018FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERificationcited by 1,375
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2016SqueezeNet: AlexNet-level accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and <0.5MB model sizecited by 1,060
- 2022Few-Shot Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning is Better and Cheaper than In-Context Learningcited by 896
- 2017Channel Pruning for Accelerating Very Deep Neural Networkscited by 702
- 2020What is the State of Neural Network Pruning?cited by 583
- 2019Importance Estimation for Neural Network Pruningcited by 541
- 2019The State of Sparsity in Deep Neural Networkscited by 476
- 2018What you can cram into a single vector: Probing sentence embeddings for linguistic propertiescited by 457
- 2018Filter Pruning via Geometric Median for Deep Convolutional Neural Networks Accelerationcited by 367
- 2018Soft Filter Pruning for Accelerating Deep Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 315
- 2014Exploiting Linear Structure Within Convolutional Networks for Efficient Evaluationcited by 306
- 2014Speeding up Convolutional Neural Networks with Low Rank Expansionscited by 284
- 2021GRAD-MATCH: Gradient Matching based Data Subset Selection for Efficient Deep Model Trainingcited by 274
- 2023Does Localization Inform Editing? Surprising Differences in Causality-Based Localization vs. Knowledge Editing in Language Modelscited by 243
- 2016Dynamic Network Surgery for Efficient DNNscited by 233
- 2017NISP: Pruning Networks using Neuron Importance Score Propagationcited by 228
- 2019MetaPruning: Meta Learning for Automatic Neural Network Channel Pruningcited by 227
- 2017Learning to Prune Deep Neural Networks via Layer-wise Optimal Brain Surgeoncited by 221
- 2016Fine-grained Analysis of Sentence Embeddings Using Auxiliary Prediction Taskscited by 216
- 2014Speeding-up Convolutional Neural Networks Using Fine-tuned CP-Decompositioncited by 203
- 2015Compression of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Fast and Low Power Mobile Applicationscited by 162
- 2015Compressing Neural Networks with the Hashing Trickcited by 150
- 2020Dynamic Model Pruning with Feedbackcited by 125
- 2023The Truth is in There: Improving Reasoning in Language Models with Layer-Selective Rank Reductioncited by 123
- 2018Rethinking the Smaller-Norm-Less-Informative Assumption in Channel Pruning of Convolution Layerscited by 112
- 2023SteerLM: Attribute Conditioned SFT as an (User-Steerable) Alternative to RLHFcited by 111
- 2015Convolutional neural networks with low-rank regularizationcited by 103
- 2017Soft Weight-Sharing for Neural Network Compressioncited by 99
50 most cited of 76 All 76 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.