Hugging Face Trending Papers

ESPO: Error-Structured Prompt Optimization via Diagnose, Diversify, and Stabilize

ESPO (Error-Structured Prompt Optimization) addresses prompt bloat in evolutionary prompt optimizers by separating optimization into Diagnose, Propose, and Select phases. It clusters training errors, generates diverse candidates, and applies bootstrap stability selection, achieving a 3.76‑point accuracy gain over GEPA on seven NLP benchmarks while producing 47% shorter prompts. Cross‑model tests on four additional student models confirm ESPO’s superior average accuracy, notably improving Qwen3 GSM8K from 15.00% to 91.40%.

arXiv AI
Sep 4

ESPO: Error-Structured Prompt Optimization via Diagnose, Diversify, and Stabilize

ESPO (Error-Structured Prompt Optimization) addresses prompt bloat in evolutionary prompt optimizers by splitting the optimization process into Diagnose, Propose, and Select phases. It clusters training errors into structural patterns, generates diverse candidate prompts through four complementary strategies, and applies bootstrap stability selection. Across seven NLP benchmarks, ESPO improves average accuracy by +3.76 pp over GEPA, produces prompts 47 % shorter, and achieves higher accuracy on four additional student models, with the largest gain on Qwen3 GSM8K.

By Lihao Liu, Peng Tang, Kunwar Yashraj Singh, Shabnam Ghadar
arXiv AI
Aug 12

RLMOpt: Adaptive Prompt Optimization via Recursive Language Models

arXiv:2608. 10471v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prompt optimizers automate the search for prompts that improve language-model performance, but existing methods rely on a predefined optimization procedure: the algorithm determines which candidates to explore and how the search progresses, while the language model generates or refines prompt proposals.

By Subhash Bangalore Satheesha, Nirvik Pande, Deepthi Duddempudi, Bharath Dandala
arXiv AI
Jun 29

When Is an LLM Worth It for Hyperparameter Optimization? A Budget-Matched Study on Tabular Data Finds the Warm-Start Is a Default Configuration, Not the Model

arXiv:2606. 21641v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as hyperparameter-optimization (HPO) advisors that "warm-start" search from prior knowledge, proposing strong configurations in very few evaluations.

By Carson Rodrigues, Oysturn Vas, Isaiah Abner DCosta, Nithish Kumar Prabhakaran
arXiv AI
Aug 20

Test-Time Scaling in the Wild: Why Exploitation, Not Exploration, Is the Bottleneck

The paper examines test‑time scaling (TTS) methods that use extra inference compute to improve language model outputs. Across five open‑ended benchmarks—medicine, law, finance, general chat, and creative writing—the study finds that increasing exploration (generating more candidates) consistently yields better top candidates, but exploitation (selecting the final output) remains weak due to poor reward‑model correlation. Only the Fusion approach, which synthesizes candidates, reliably improves results, yet it recovers only about 40% of the potential quality, indicating that the bottleneck lies in choosing from the candidate pool rather than generating it.

By Davide Romano, Kanak Raj, Jerrod Parker, Daniele Giofr\`e