Neurosymbolic LoRA: Why and When to Tune Weights vs. Rewrite Prompts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) can be adapted either through numerical updates that alter model parameters or symbolic manipulations that work on discrete prompts or logical constraints. While numerical fine-tuning excels at injecting new factual knowledge, symbolic updates offer flexible control of style and alignment without retraining. We introduce a neurosymbolic LoRA framework that dynamically combines these two complementary strategies. Specifically, we present a unified monitoring signal and a reward-based classifier to decide when to employ LoRA for deeper factual reconstruction and when to apply TextGrad for token-level edits. Our approach remains memory-efficient by offloading the symbolic transformations to an external LLM only when needed. Additionally, the refined prompts produced during symbolic editing serve as high-quality, reusable training data, an important benefit in data-scarce domains like mathematical reasoning. Extensive experiments across multiple LLM backbones show that neurosymbolic LoRA consistently outperforms purely numerical or purely symbolic baselines, demonstrating superior adaptability and improved performance. Our findings highlight the value of interleaving numerical and symbolic updates to unlock a new level of versatility in language model fine-tuning.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jan 2026.
Builds on
17 of 27 references.
References · 17
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,915
- 2021The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuningcited by 3,795
- 2023DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelinescited by 832
- 2021P-Tuning v2: Prompt Tuning Can Be Comparable to Fine-tuning Universally Across Scales and Taskscited by 689
- 2022Demonstrate-Search-Predict: Composing retrieval and language models for knowledge-intensive NLPcited by 318
- 2015Towards AI-Complete Question Answering: A Set of Prerequisite Toy Taskscited by 314
- 2021Symbolic Knowledge Distillation: from General Language Models to Commonsense Modelscited by 270
- 2024LLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworkscited by 179
- 2020NeuroLogic Decoding: (Un)supervised Neural Text Generation with Predicate Logic Constraintscited by 149
- 2021Differentiable Prompt Makes Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 115
5 more
- 2024Fine-Tuning and Prompt Optimization: Two Great Steps that Work Better Togethercited by 40
- 2023Universality and Limitations of Prompt Tuningcited by 30
- 2024Adaptable Logical Control for Large Language Modelscited by 30
- 2023Injecting Logical Constraints into Neural Networks via Straight-Through Estimatorscited by 12
- 2024Neuro-symbolic Learning Yielding Logical Constraintscited by 12
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Learning Rate Matters: Vanilla LoRA May Suffice for LLM Fine-tuning
- 2024LoRA-XS: Low-Rank Adaptation with Extremely Small Number of Parameters
- 2025Dual LoRA: Enhancing LoRA with Magnitude and Direction Updates
- 2025Towards Alignment-Centric Paradigm: A Survey of Instruction Tuning in Large Language Models
- 2025Slimming Down LLMs Without Losing Their Minds
- 2025LoRA-One: One-Step Full Gradient Could Suffice for Fine-Tuning Large Language Models, Provably and Efficiently
- 2025LoRA Is Slower Than You Think
- 2025L1RA: Dynamic Rank Assignment in LoRA Fine-Tuning