Adaptations that seem deficient compared to instruction-tuning (finetuning on instruction-response pairs) can still implicitly yield instruction-following language models. We show that training solely on responses, without any corresponding instructions, yields instruction following. This suggests that instruction-tuning just needs to teach the desired distribution of responses. However, we then show that one can finetune on instruction-response pairs from a distribution unlike the test distribution of instructions, like just poetry, or just math, and still yield a model that broadly follows instructions. Instead of acting, e.g., just as math models, these single-task models sometimes behave more as general-purpose chatbots for, e.g., non-math instructions. To begin to explain this implicit instruction tuning, we hypothesize that simple changes to a language model’s distribution yield instruction following. We support this by hand-writing a rule-based adapter that yields instruction-following behavior in language models. The rules are to slowly increase the probability of ending the sequence, penalize repetition, and uniformly change 15 words’ probabilities. In summary, adaptations made without being designed to yield instruction following can do so implicitly.
Keywords: instruction tuning, instruction following, ablation, rule-based
TL;DR: Many adaptations that are deficient compared to instruction tuning also yield instruction-following language models
Abstract:
Primary Area: foundation or frontier models, including LLMs
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 5056
Loading