mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How Should a Prompt Optimizer Spend a Tight Budget? BudgetAPO with Noise-Adaptive Evaluation

arXiv 2610.05671 ↗First posted 5 Oct 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Automatic prompt optimization (APO) has been widely employed to adapt large language models without updating their weights, yielding promising results. However, existing methods such as GEPA and OPRO assume hundreds to thousands of subject-model calls, far more than is practical behind paid, rate-limited APIs. Under tight budgets they fail in two ways: multi-stage pipelines can exhaust the budget and return the seed prompt unchanged, while single-stage methods compare candidates on fixed-size minibatches, regardless of each task's noise. As a remedy, we introduce BudgetAPO, a single-stage optimizer for the tight-budget regime. BudgetAPO incorporates (1) a noise-adaptive rule that sizes the evaluation slice to each task's noise, measured by a short probe; (2) a fixed slice that turns every accept/reject decision into a paired comparison; and (3) a reflective operator that rewrites reasoning strategy and output format jointly. Extensive results across seven benchmarks and five subject models demonstrate that BudgetAPO ranks first on every subject and beats every baseline under Holm-corrected paired tests, while returning the seed in 13% of runs at 250 calls against 86% for GEPA. On GPT-OSS-20B, GEPA needs 5 times as many calls to match method's 100-call score.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Oct 2026.

Builds on

11 of 43 references.

References · 11

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
  2. 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,045
  3. 2023DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelinescited by 832
  4. 2026GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineeringcited by 587
  5. 2023Promptbreeder: Self-Referential Self-Improvement Via Prompt Evolutioncited by 551
  6. 2024tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examplescited by 310
  7. 2026Gemma 4 Technical Reportcited by 259
  8. 2025Generalizing Verifiable Instruction Followingcited by 194
  9. 2025CAPO: Cost-Aware Prompt Optimizationcited by 7
  10. 2026More Is Not Always Better: Cross-Component Interference in LLM Agent Scaffoldingcited by 1
  11. 2026Instruction Stacking Collapse: A Benchmark and the Capability-Dependent Value of Prompt Compilationcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.