mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

From Instance Selection to Fixed-Pool Data Recipe Search for Supervised Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2605.12944 ↗First posted 13 May 2026cs.LG cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) data selection is commonly formulated as instance ranking: score each example and retain a top-k subset. However, effective SFT training subsets are often produced through ordered curation recipes, where filtering, mixing, and deduplication operators jointly shape the final data distribution. We formulate this problem as fixed-pool data recipe search: given a raw instruction pool and a library of grounded operators, the goal is to discover an executable recipe that constructs a high-quality selected subset under a limited budget of full SFT evaluations, without generating, rewriting, or augmenting training samples. We introduce AutoSelection, a two-layer solver that decouples fixed-pool materialization based on cached task-, data-, and model-side signals from expensive full evaluation, using warmup probes, realized subset states, local recipe edits, Gaussian-process-assisted ranking, and stagnation-triggered reseeding. Experiments on a 90K instruction pool show that AutoSelection achieves the strongest in-distribution reasoning average across three base models, outperforming full-data training, random recipe search, random top-k, and single-operator selectors. Additional Out-of-distribution graph-reasoning results, search-stability analyses, structural ablations, and 1.5B-to-7B transfer checks further show that recipe structure matters beyond individual selection operators. Code is available at https://github.com/w253/AutoSelection.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 May 2026.

Builds on

32 of 44 references.

References · 32

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  2. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  3. 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,748
  4. 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
  5. 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,970
  6. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,359
  7. 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 705
  8. 2016Hyperband: A Novel Bandit-Based Approach to Hyperparameter Optimizationcited by 688
  9. 2024LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction Tuningcited by 514
  10. 2018BOHB: Robust and Efficient Hyperparameter Optimization at Scalecited by 466
  11. 2023DoReMi: Optimizing Data Mixtures Speeds Up Language Model Pretrainingcited by 385
  12. 2023What Makes Good Data for Alignment? A Comprehensive Study of Automatic Data Selection in Instruction Tuningcited by 354
20 more
  1. 2023From Quantity to Quality: Boosting LLM Performance with Self-Guided Data Selection for Instruction Tuningcited by 301
  2. 2023SemDeDup: Data-efficient learning at web-scale through semantic deduplicationcited by 295
  3. 2023Can Language Models Solve Graph Problems in Natural Language?cited by 249
  4. 2023Data Diversity Matters for Robust Instruction Tuningcited by 76
  5. 2023Data-Juicer: A One-Stop Data Processing System for Large Language Modelscited by 52
  6. 2024SmallToLarge (S2L): Scalable Data Selection for Fine-tuning Large Language Models by Summarizing Training Trajectories of Small Modelscited by 43
  7. 2025Large-Scale Data Selection for Instruction Tuningcited by 34
  8. 2023A Preliminary Study of the Intrinsic Relationship between Complexity and Alignmentcited by 33
  9. 2024Smaller Language Models are capable of selecting Instruction-Tuning Training Data for Larger Language Modelscited by 32
  10. 2025Entropy-Gated Branching for Efficient Test-Time Reasoningcited by 21
  11. 2023LIMIT: Less Is More for Instruction Tuning Across Evaluation Paradigmscited by 14
  12. 2025LEAD: Iterative Data Selection for Efficient LLM Instruction Tuningcited by 13
  13. 2024Chasing Random: Instruction Selection Strategies Fail to Generalizecited by 12
  14. 2026Where Hindsight Credit Can Reside: A Signed-Capacity View of Token Updates in RLVRcited by 8
  15. 2025Evaluating Data Influence in Meta Learningcited by 4
  16. 2025Task-Specific Data Selection for Instruction Tuning via Monosemantic Neuronal Activationscited by 4
  17. 2026A Critical Look at Targeted Instruction Selection: Disentangling What Matters (and What Doesn't)cited by 3
  18. 2026DataChef: Cooking Up Optimal Data Recipes for LLM Adaptation via Reinforcement Learningcited by 2
  19. 2026Automatic Configuration of LLM Post-Training Pipelinescited by 2
  20. 2026LLM-AutoDP: Automatic Data Processing via LLM Agents for Model Fine-tuningcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.