Model-Aware Data Selection from In-and-Out Information Interplay
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
LLMs are effective representations that assimilate vast amounts of knowledge during pretraining, but post-training is necessary for models to reliably access this knowledge and "know what they know." We observe an interesting rank equilibrium between knowledge stored in the weights and the data stream passing through the model. Across all model layers, we find that the hidden states (data stream) follow a U-shaped pattern, showing substantial compression in early layers and a steep rise during the late-layer decoding phase. In contrast, the weight rank follows an inverted U-shaped pattern, with very low rank in the early and late layers and high rank in the middle. We interpret this as an in-and-out information interplay: intermediate activations do not need to carry content that the weights can supply later, so they primarily preserve what the weights cannot provide. Motivated by this observation, we propose a model-aware data selection method, CAP (Counterfactual Assimilation Profile), which can determine whether a data candidate contains information accessible to the current model by utilizing the divergence gap in early- and late-layer representations between model-generated and reference responses. Across math, code, and science domains, CAP delivers 35.4% greater average improvement over the base model than the strongest baseline under different selection budgets. With only 10% of the data pool, CAP surpasses or matches full-pool training on math and science. We further show that CAP transfers to multimodal data selection and is robust to response horizon and noise.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.
Builds on
25 of 36 references.
References · 25
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,718
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
- 2023Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinkscited by 2,115
- 2024MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmarkcited by 1,758
- 2023SparseGPT: Massive Language Models Can Be Accurately Pruned in One-Shotcited by 1,090
- 2023A Simple and Effective Pruning Approach for Large Language Modelscited by 776
- 2020Intrinsic Dimensionality Explains the Effectiveness of Language Model Fine-Tuningcited by 658
- 2021Knowledge Neurons in Pretrained Transformerscited by 590
- 2023Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lenscited by 579
- 2024LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction Tuningcited by 514
13 more
- 2023What Makes Good Data for Alignment? A Comprehensive Study of Automatic Data Selection in Instruction Tuningcited by 354
- 2023Data Selection for Language Models via Importance Resamplingcited by 322
- 2024Molmo and PixMo: Open Weights and Open Data for State-of-the-Art Vision-Language Modelscited by 321
- 2023From Quantity to Quality: Boosting LLM Performance with Self-Guided Data Selection for Instruction Tuningcited by 301
- 2024Massive Activations in Large Language Modelscited by 277
- 2023FinanceBench: A New Benchmark for Financial Question Answeringcited by 261
- 2023Language Modeling Is Compressioncited by 225
- 2024QuRating: Selecting High-Quality Data for Training Language Modelscited by 153
- 2021The Low-Rank Simplicity Bias in Deep Networkscited by 150
- 2024MAmmoTH2: Scaling Instructions from the Webcited by 143
- 2026Molmo2: Open Weights and Data for Vision-Language Models with Video Understanding and Groundingcited by 132
- 2024OpenCoder: The Open Cookbook for Top-Tier Code Large Language Modelscited by 127
- 2025MedCaseReasoning: Evaluating and learning diagnostic reasoning from clinical case reportscited by 34
Built on by
Not cited yet.