Token Utility Is Selection-Conditioned: Coupled Selection of Prompt Context and Response Supervision for Instruction Tuning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Token selection for instruction tuning is coupled: supervision utility depends on retained context, and vice versa. Existing methods largely optimize prompt compression or response supervision separately. Combining selectors can value supervision using removed context, or context using excluded supervision, creating selection-state mismatch. BRIDGE (Budgeted Response-Prompt Interaction via Directional Gradient-guided Efficient Token Selection) models selection-conditioned token utility through a shared validation-directed surrogate objective. BRIDGE routes response utility to supporting prompt tokens through attention, then alternates budgeted selection to revalue each side under the other's retained subset. Updates reuse precomputed interactions without repeated model scoring, while structure-aware projection promotes coherent supervision spans. Across three model families and three task domains, BRIDGE performs best overall among evaluated selection methods. Its MATH advantage over independent selection grows with compression, reaching 1.66 percentage points on Llama-3.2-3B.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Sep 2026.
Builds on
18 of 28 references.
References · 18
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,886
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
- 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
- 2024LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction Tuningcited by 532
- 2023LongLLMLingua: Accelerating and Enhancing LLMs in Long Context Scenarios via Prompt Compressioncited by 453
- 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 389
- 2023What Makes Good Data for Alignment? A Comprehensive Study of Automatic Data Selection in Instruction Tuningcited by 364
- 2024LLMLingua-2: Data Distillation for Efficient and Faithful Task-Agnostic Prompt Compressioncited by 348
- 2024Superfiltering: Weak-to-Strong Data Filtering for Fast Instruction-Tuningcited by 138
6 more
- 2024Unveiling the Secret Recipe: A Guide For Supervised Fine-Tuning Small LLMscited by 40
- 2025Token Cleaning: Fine-Grained Data Selection for LLM Supervised Fine-Tuningcited by 39
- 2024Instruction Fine-Tuning: Does Prompt Loss Matter?cited by 26
- 2026ProFit: Leveraging High-Value Signals in SFT via Probability-Guided Token Selectioncited by 18
- 2025T-SHIRT: Token-Selective Hierarchical Data Selection for Instruction Tuningcited by 13
- 2026GIST: Targeted Data Selection for Instruction Tuning via Coupled Optimization Geometrycited by 8
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024ROSE: A Reward-Oriented Data Selection Framework for LLM Task-Specific Instruction Tuning
- 2026Reflective Prompt Tuning through Language Model Function-Calling
- 2025SelecTKD: Selective Token-Weighted Knowledge Distillation for LLMs
- 2026DIAL-OPD: Learning More from Fewer Tokens in On-Policy Distillation
- 2026Do Instruction-Tuned Models Always Perform Better Than Base Models? Evidence from Math and Domain-Shifted Benchmarks
- 2025Reinforcement Learning-Guided Chain-of-Draft for Token-Efficient Code Generation
- 2026Reward-Aligned Distillation
- 2026MILES: Modular Instruction Memory with Learnable Selection for Self-Improving LLM Reasoning