Papers › Instruction Tuning With Loss Over Instructions
Instruction Tuning With Loss Over Instructions
Zhengyan Shi, Adam X. Yang, Bin Wu, Laurence Aitchison, Emine Yilmaz, Aldo Lipani
Instruction tuning plays a crucial role in shaping the outputs of language models (LMs) to desired styles. In this work, we propose a simple yet effective method, Instruction Modelling (IM), which trains LMs by applying a loss function to the instruction and prompt part rather than solely to the output part. Through experiments across 21 diverse benchmarks, we show that, in many scenarios, IM can effectively improve the LM performance on both NLP tasks (e.g., MMLU, TruthfulQA, and HumanEval) and open-ended generation benchmarks (e.g., MT-Bench and AlpacaEval). Remarkably, in the most advantageous case, IM boosts model performance on AlpacaEval 1.0 by over 100%. We identify two key factors influencing the effectiveness of IM: (1) The ratio between instruction length and output length in the training data; and (2) The number of training examples. We observe that IM is especially beneficial when trained on datasets with lengthy instructions paired with brief outputs, or under the Superficial Alignment Hypothesis (SAH) where a small amount of training examples are used for instruction tuning. Further analysis substantiates our hypothesis that our improvement can be attributed to reduced overfitting to instruction tuning datasets. It is worth noting that we are not proposing \ours as a replacement for current fine-tuning processes. Instead, our work aims to provide practical guidance for instruction tuning LMs, especially in low-resource scenarios.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2405.14394")
Code
Syntology Ran 12 of 20 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 8 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · our draft was wrong; 10 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 20 samples from 1 repository, 12 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
20 samples harvested; 12 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 8 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: 20 of the 20 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 ZhengxiangShi/InstructionModelling. “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.
1447821f32348ac5 · report
9104e80d99f2ab8a · report
969b779909d41a48 · report
1cb0eeb16cf04ee3 · report
8a32cc283c5e5807 · report
fc23892a28f95bc1 · report
c90f3a5ec6457c6d · report
e7170ef85d1fec78 · report
cb1ba0cfe1a9de8a · report
88c99652268092f3 · report
d09e0781a55d3694 · report
8813cfd84beec509 · report
c46f87d3e93c4108 · report
9cc81ad65b572087 · report
697d92a5d51eff3e · report
96351a65183bb428 · report
f839fd4c6f96a26f · report
e5ce78b681258794 · report
1c89153db0460637 · report
08f4816632095bc7 · report
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