PRISM: Preference-Aware Influence Function Based Data Selection Method for Efficient Fine-Tuning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As LLMs continue to scale up, improving training efficiency heavily relies on effective data utilization. Data selection mitigates this issue by allocating the limited training budget to high-value examples that optimally facilitate the model's target behavior. Most existing approaches define target behavior via a set of target examples and score candidate training data based on their estimated influence on these samples. However, such methods uniformly treat all target examples as equally important, ignoring the varying relevance of individual examples to model optimization. Specifically, target examples that align closely with the model's inherent behavior deliver stronger supervisory signals, whereas discrepant examples yield only weak and ineffective local guidance. We propose PRISM, a Preference-aware Influence function based Data Selection Method. It leverages model preference to assign weights to target examples and builds a preference-aware target direction. PRISM evaluates candidate training samples according to their influence on this direction, and prioritizes data budget allocation to samples that effectively drive the model to match expected target behavior. Theoretical analysis verifies that weighted preference construction generates a superior first-order gradient direction for boosting target preference, compared with uniform aggregation strategies. Extensive experiments covering diverse model architectures and parameter scales demonstrate that PRISM achieves better performance in efficient fine-tuning and safety-aligned supervised fine-tuning rectification. The results validate that accurate characterization of target behavior serves as the core of cost-effective data selection.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 37 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 May 2026.
Builds on
37 of 43 references.
References · 37
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
- 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,789
- 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,418
- 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,807
- 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,741
- 2024LlamaFactory: Unified Efficient Fine-Tuning of 100+ Language Modelscited by 1,464
25 more
- 2023The Flan Collection: Designing Data and Methods for Effective Instruction Tuningcited by 739
- 2023OpenAssistant Conversations -- Democratizing Large Language Model Alignmentcited by 721
- 2019Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learningcited by 629
- 2020Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient Descentcited by 580
- 2024LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction Tuningcited by 532
- 2020TyDi QA: A Benchmark for Information-Seeking Question Answering in Typologically Diverse Languagescited by 488
- 2025Persona Vectors: Monitoring and Controlling Character Traits in Language Modelscited by 345
- 2023TRAK: Attributing Model Behavior at Scalecited by 283
- 2018Representer Point Selection for Explaining Deep Neural Networkscited by 187
- 2018Fast Approximate Natural Gradient Descent in a Kronecker-factored Eigenbasiscited by 146
- 2023DataInf: Efficiently Estimating Data Influence in LoRA-tuned LLMs and Diffusion Modelscited by 123
- 2024Data-efficient Fine-tuning for LLM-based Recommendationcited by 104
- 2026ATBench: A Diverse and Realistic Agent Trajectory Benchmark for Safety Evaluation and Diagnosiscited by 36
- 2025Improving Influence-based Instruction Tuning Data Selection for Balanced Learning of Diverse Capabilitiescited by 23
- 2024RECOST: External Knowledge Guided Data-efficient Instruction Tuningcited by 18
- 2025Emergent Misalignment via In-Context Learning: Narrow in-context examples can produce broadly misaligned LLMscited by 17
- 2025Efficient Data Selection at Scale via Influence Distillationcited by 15
- 2024DELIFT: Data Efficient Language model Instruction Fine Tuningcited by 14
- 2025Group-Level Data Selection for Efficient Pretrainingcited by 13
- 2024Federated Data-Efficient Instruction Tuning for Large Language Modelscited by 10
- 2025Influence Functions for Efficient Data Selection in Reasoningcited by 10
- 2026Influence-Preserving Proxies for Gradient-Based Data Selection in LLM Fine-tuningcited by 10
- 2025LLMs Deceive Unintentionally: Emergent Misalignment in Dishonesty from Misaligned Samples to Biased Human-AI Interactionscited by 8
- 2026Concept Influence: Leveraging Interpretability to Improve Performance and Efficiency in Training Data Attributioncited by 8
- 2025IF-GUIDE: Influence Function-Guided Detoxification of LLMscited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Data-DPO: Direct Preference Optimization for Target Model Data Selection in LLM Post-Training
- 2025Influence Functions for Preference Dataset Pruning
- 2026Training-Aware Target Coverage for Synthetic Data Selection
- 2026Dr. Post-Training: A Data Regularization Perspective on LLM Post-Training
- 2024ROSE: A Reward-Oriented Data Selection Framework for LLM Task-Specific Instruction Tuning
- 2024Optimizing LLMs with Direct Preferences: A Data Efficiency Perspective
- 2024Preference Fine-Tuning of LLMs Should Leverage Suboptimal, On-Policy Data
- 2024Understanding Forgetting in LLM Supervised Fine-Tuning and Preference Learning -- A Convex Optimization Perspective