Papers › From Reading to Compressing: Exploring the Multi-document Reader for Prompt Compression

From Reading to Compressing: Exploring the Multi-document Reader for Prompt Compression

5 Oct 2024arXiv:2410.04139archive 2025-07-28

Eunseong Choi, Sunkyung Lee, Minjin Choi, June Park, Jongwuk Lee

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved significant performance gains using advanced prompting techniques over various tasks. However, the increasing length of prompts leads to high computational costs and often obscures crucial information. Prompt compression has been proposed to alleviate these issues, but it faces challenges in (i) capturing the global context and (ii) training the compressor effectively. To tackle these challenges, we introduce a novel prompt compression method, namely Reading To Compressing (R2C), utilizing the Fusion-in-Decoder (FiD) architecture to identify the important information in the prompt. Specifically, the cross-attention scores of the FiD are used to discern essential chunks and sentences from the prompt. R2C effectively captures the global context without compromising semantic consistency while detouring the necessity of pseudo-labels for training the compressor. Empirical results show that R2C retains key contexts, enhancing the LLM performance by 6% in out-of-domain evaluations while reducing the prompt length by 80%.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

15 samples harvested; 13 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 15 of the 15 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from eunseongc/r2c. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections