Papers › SMART: Robust and Efficient Fine-Tuning for Pre-trained Natural Language Models...

SMART: Robust and Efficient Fine-Tuning for Pre-trained Natural Language Models through Principled Regularized Optimization

8 Nov 2019ACL 2020 6arXiv:1911.03437archive 2025-07-28

Haoming Jiang, Pengcheng He, Weizhu Chen, Xiaodong Liu, Jianfeng Gao, Tuo Zhao

Transfer learning has fundamentally changed the landscape of natural language processing (NLP) research. Many existing state-of-the-art models are first pre-trained on a large text corpus and then fine-tuned on downstream tasks. However, due to limited data resources from downstream tasks and the extremely large capacity of pre-trained models, aggressive fine-tuning often causes the adapted model to overfit the data of downstream tasks and forget the knowledge of the pre-trained model. To address the above issue in a more principled manner, we propose a new computational framework for robust and efficient fine-tuning for pre-trained language models. Specifically, our proposed framework contains two important ingredients: 1. Smoothness-inducing regularization, which effectively manages the capacity of the model; 2. Bregman proximal point optimization, which is a class of trust-region methods and can prevent knowledge forgetting. Our experiments demonstrate that our proposed method achieves the state-of-the-art performance on multiple NLP benchmarks.

PaperPDFConference PDFCodeCode Syntology ran

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="1911.03437")

Code

Syntology Ran 6 of 8 code samples harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · violated contract; 3 ran · fixture could not drive it.

By repository: community (archive-listed): 7 samples from 2 repositories, 5 ran; 1 identical to code first harvested elsewhere. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

namisan/mt-dnn officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch report
chunhuililili/mt_dnn mentioned on GitHubpytorch report
cliang1453/camero mentioned on GitHubpytorch report
microsoft/MT-DNN mentioned on GitHubpytorchMIT report

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

8 samples harvested; 6 ran; 2 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.

2ran · honoured contract
1ran · violated contract
3ran · fixture could not drive it
2unverified

Licence: 1 of the 8 samples is 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 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. Some samples are identical code Syntology first harvested from another repository; for those, this paper's copy is not located and its licence is not recorded. “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.

default archinetai/smart-pytorch/smart_pytorch/smart_pytorch.py community (archive-listed) ran · honoured contract MIT (permissive) · c3932e0eff6d7c92 · report
inf_norm archinetai/smart-pytorch/smart_pytorch/smart_pytorch.py community (archive-listed) ran · honoured contract fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 43812e8f014de7b9 · report
js_loss archinetai/smart-pytorch/smart_pytorch/loss.py community (archive-listed) ran · fixture could not drive it MIT (permissive) · acf00a3e56df0585 · report
kl_loss archinetai/smart-pytorch/smart_pytorch/loss.py community (archive-listed) ran · fixture could not drive it MIT (permissive) · 9f77e2bc0dc49ca0 · report
sym_kl_loss archinetai/smart-pytorch/smart_pytorch/loss.py community (archive-listed) ran · fixture could not drive it MIT (permissive) · e84d702dcea1d1de · report
default archinetai/vat-pytorch/vat_pytorch/utils.py community (archive-listed) unverified MIT (permissive) · c1c06b9077cc6e02 · report
exists archinetai/vat-pytorch/vat_pytorch/utils.py community (archive-listed) unverified MIT (permissive) · 3c4599eeaaa1d994 · report
exists identical code first harvested elsewhere ran · violated contract licence of this copy not recorded · aa5486a3650902d8 · report

Tasks

Linguistic AcceptabilityNatural Language InferenceNatural Language UnderstandingParaphrase IdentificationSemantic Textual SimilaritySentiment AnalysisTransfer Learning

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Natural Language Inference AX T5 Accuracy 53.1 #1 of 1 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MNLI + SNLI + ANLI + FEVER SMARTRoBERTa-LARGE % Dev Accuracy 57.1 #1 of 1 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MNLI + SNLI + ANLI + FEVER SMARTRoBERTa-LARGE % Test Accuracy 57.1 #1 of 1 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI T5 Matched 92.0 #3 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI T5 Mismatched 91.7 #3 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI MT-DNN-SMARTv0 Accuracy 85.7 #62 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI MT-DNN-SMART Accuracy 85.7 #63 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI SMART+BERT-BASE Accuracy 85.6 #64 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI SMARTRoBERTa Dev Matched 91.1 #66 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI SMARTRoBERTa Dev Mismatched 91.3 #66 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI SMART-BERT Dev Matched 85.6 #67 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference MultiNLI SMART-BERT Dev Mismatched 86.0 #67 of 67 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference QNLI ALICE Accuracy 99.2% #3 of 43 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference QNLI MT-DNN-SMART Accuracy 99.2% #4 of 43 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference RTE T5-XXL 11B Accuracy 92.5% #8 of 90 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference RTE SMARTRoBERTa Accuracy 92.0% #12 of 90 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference RTE SMART-BERT Accuracy 71.2% #50 of 90 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference RTE SMART Accuracy 71.2% #51 of 90 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SNLI MT-DNN-SMARTLARGEv0 % Dev Accuracy 92.6 #9 of 98 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SNLI MT-DNN-SMARTLARGEv0 % Test Accuracy 91.7 #9 of 98 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SNLI MT-DNN-SMART_100%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 91.6 #94 of 98 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SNLI MT-DNN-SMART_10%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 88.7 #95 of 98 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SNLI MT-DNN-SMART_1%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 86 #96 of 98 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SNLI MT-DNN-SMART_0.1%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 82.7 #97 of 98 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SciTail MT-DNN-SMART_100%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 96.1 #9 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SciTail MT-DNN-SMART_10%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 91.3 #10 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SciTail MT-DNN-SMART_1%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 88.6 #11 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SciTail MT-DNN-SMART_0.1%ofTrainingData Dev Accuracy 82.3 #12 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SciTail MT-DNN-SMARTLARGEv0 % Dev Accuracy 96.6 #13 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Inference SciTail MT-DNN-SMARTLARGEv0 % Test Accuracy 95.2 #13 of 13 Archive leaderboard report
Natural Language Understanding GLUE MT-DNN-SMART Average 89.9 #1 of 2 Archive leaderboard report
Paraphrase Identification Quora Question Pairs ALICE F1 90.7 #1 of 31 Archive leaderboard report
Paraphrase Identification Quora Question Pairs FreeLB Accuracy 74.8 #28 of 31 Archive leaderboard report
Paraphrase Identification Quora Question Pairs FreeLB Dev Accuracy 92.6 #28 of 31 Archive leaderboard report
Paraphrase Identification Quora Question Pairs SMART-BERT Dev Accuracy 91.5 #30 of 31 Archive leaderboard report
Paraphrase Identification Quora Question Pairs SMART-BERT Dev F1 88.5 #30 of 31 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity MRPC MT-DNN-SMART Accuracy 93.7% #1 of 45 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity MRPC MT-DNN-SMART F1 91.7 #1 of 45 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity MRPC SMART Accuracy 91.3% #6 of 45 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity STS Benchmark MT-DNN-SMART Pearson Correlation 0.929 #1 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity STS Benchmark MT-DNN-SMART Spearman Correlation 0.925 #1 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity STS Benchmark SMARTRoBERTa Dev Pearson Correlation 92.8 #65 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity STS Benchmark SMARTRoBERTa Dev Spearman Correlation 92.6 #65 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity STS Benchmark SMART-BERT Dev Pearson Correlation 90.0 #66 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Semantic Textual Similarity STS Benchmark SMART-BERT Dev Spearman Correlation 89.4 #66 of 66 Archive leaderboard report
Sentiment Analysis SST-2 Binary classification MT-DNN-SMART Accuracy 97.5 #2 of 87 Archive leaderboard report
Sentiment Analysis SST-2 Binary classification MT-DNN Accuracy 93.6 #39 of 87 Archive leaderboard report
Sentiment Analysis SST-2 Binary classification SMART+BERT-BASE Accuracy 93 #45 of 87 Archive leaderboard report
Sentiment Analysis SST-2 Binary classification SMARTRoBERTa Dev Accuracy 96.9 #84 of 87 Archive leaderboard report
Sentiment Analysis SST-2 Binary classification SMART-MT-DNN Dev Accuracy 96.1 #85 of 87 Archive leaderboard report
Sentiment Analysis SST-2 Binary classification SMART-BERT Dev Accuracy 93.0 #86 of 87 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

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