Skip to content

DRIFT: Data Selection for LLM Instruction Tuning via On-Policy Attribution

Jun 2026 · 1 citation · 55 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work proposes DRIFT (Data Refinement via On-Policy Influence Functions for Supervised Fine-Tuning), a data attribution method built on influence functions that outperforms all evaluated data selection baselines on Olmo3-7B-Instruct-SFT and OpenR1-Distill-7B, raising average accuracy across eight benchmarks.

Abstract

Data selection for instruction tuning is usually studied for efficiency, reaching strong performance with a fraction of the training data. We ask whether data selection can instead raise the performance ceiling, producing a better model than training on all the available data. To test this, we take a large language model (LLM) that has already completed supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on its full corpus and train it further on examples selected from that same corpus. Any gain therefore lifts the model above the ceiling set by full-data training. Existing selection methods yield little or no gain in this setting. We propose DRIFT (Data Refinement via On-Policy Influence Functions for Supervised Fine-Tuning), a data attribution method built on influence functions. DRIFT samples the model's own responses to validation queries and weights them by correctness to form a validation objective. It ranks the examples of the original corpus by their estimated influence on this objective, and the model then continues SFT on the top-ranked subset. This design is motivated by the proximity gap in influence function theory: we hypothesize that these on-policy responses are better validation targets than external references in terms of locality. DRIFT also corrects influence scores for their dependence on gradient norm within each validation task. DRIFT outperforms all evaluated data selection baselines on Olmo3-7B-Instruct-SFT and OpenR1-Distill-7B, raising average accuracy across eight benchmarks from 39.17 to 40.14 and from 57.23 to 58.66, respectively, with gains on benchmarks not used for attribution.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60
#artificial intelligence Open access May 2023

Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark

GAOKAO-Bench is introduced, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples, including both subjective and objective questions that contribute a robust evaluation benchmark for future large language models and offers valuable insights into the advantages and limitations...

Xiaotian Zhang, Chun-yan Li, Yi Zong et al. · 216 citations · ⚡17

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 29, 2026

Who we become when we talk to machines

Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.