Improving Probability-based Prompt Selection Through Unified Evaluation and Analysis

Sohee Yang,Jonghyeon Kim,Joel Jang,Seonghyeon Ye,Hyunji Lee,Minjoon Seo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.14877

2024-03-09

Abstract:Previous works in prompt engineering for large language models have introduced different gradient-free probability-based prompt selection methods that aim to choose the optimal prompt among the candidates for a given task but have failed to provide a comprehensive and fair comparison between each other. In this paper, we propose a unified framework to interpret and evaluate the existing probability-based prompt selection methods by performing extensive experiments on 13 common and diverse NLP tasks. We find that each of the existing methods can be interpreted as some variant of the method that maximizes mutual information between the input and the predicted output (MI). Utilizing this finding, we develop several other combinatorial variants of MI and increase the effectiveness of the oracle prompt selection method from 87.79% to 94.98%, measured as the ratio of the performance of the selected prompt to that of the optimal oracle prompt. Furthermore, considering that all the methods rely on the output probability distribution of the model that might be biased, we propose a novel calibration method called Calibration by Marginalization (CBM) that is orthogonal to the existing methods and helps increase the prompt selection effectiveness of the best method to 96.85%, achieving 99.44% of the oracle prompt F1 without calibration.

Computation and Language

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### The Problem the Paper Attempts to Solve

This paper aims to address the lack of comprehensive and fair comparison in probabilistic prompt selection methods in large language models (LLMs). Specifically:

1. **Limitations of Existing Methods**: Although existing probabilistic prompt selection methods can choose the optimal prompt from candidate prompts to complete a given task, there is a lack of systematic comparative analysis between these methods.
2. **Proposal of a Unified Framework**: To fill this gap, the authors propose a unified framework to explain and evaluate existing probabilistic prompt selection methods. Through extensive experiments on 13 common and diverse natural language processing tasks, the authors find that each existing method can be interpreted as a variant of maximizing the mutual information (MI) between the input and the predicted output.
3. **Performance Improvement**: Utilizing this finding, the authors develop several combined variants of MI and improve the effectiveness of the best prompt selection method from 87.79% to 94.98%, measured as the ratio of the performance of the selected prompt to the performance of the optimal prompt.
4. **Proposal of a Calibration Method**: Considering that all methods rely on the output probability distribution of the model, which may be biased, the authors propose a new calibration method—Calibration by Marginalization (CBM). This method is orthogonal to existing methods and helps improve the effectiveness of the best method's prompt selection to 96.85%, achieving 99.44% of the optimal prompt F1 in the uncalibrated case.

### Summary

This paper proposes a unified evaluation framework to systematically compare existing probabilistic prompt selection methods and, on this basis, develops new combined variants and calibration methods, significantly improving the effectiveness of prompt selection. This provides an important reference for performance optimization of large language models in practical applications.