Skip to content

ESPO: Error-Structured Prompt Optimization via Diagnose, Diversify, and Stabilize

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 30 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

ESO (Error-Structured Prompt Optimization), which decomposes prompt optimization into three phases: Diagnose clusters all training errors into structural patterns in one round; generate candidates via four complementary strategies with independent biases; Select applies bootstrap stability selection.

Abstract

Evolutionary prompt optimizers such as GEPA suffer from prompt bloat: each iteration appends rules and caveats, producing prompts up to 3$\times$ longer yet no more accurate. We trace this to three deficiencies - incomplete error observation, limited search diversity, and unreliable selection - and propose ESPO (Error-Structured Prompt Optimization), which decomposes prompt optimization into three phases: Diagnose clusters all training errors into structural patterns in one round; Propose generates candidates via four complementary strategies with independent biases; Select applies bootstrap stability selection. On seven public NLP benchmarks - Tweet, MMLU, GSM8K, HotpotQA, ScoNe, HoVer, and PUPA - ESPO improves average accuracy by $+$3.76 pp over the state-of-the-art (74.67% vs 70.91% for GEPA), matching or exceeding GEPA on every dataset while producing prompts 47% shorter (1,004 vs 1,878 chars) and faster at inference. Cross-model experiments across four additional student models (Gemma 3 12B, Mistral 14B, Qwen3 32B, Claude Haiku 4.5) show ESPO yields the best average accuracy on every model tested, with the largest gap on Qwen3 GSM8K (15.00% $\to$ 91.40%). A generalization bound (Appendix) grounds each phase in a corresponding term of the test-time gap, and the ablation confirms a key prediction: adding diversity without bootstrap selection actually hurts performance ($-$1.20%).

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Failure-Guided Co-Evolution of Prompts and Training Data

ForGE is introduced, a failure-guided framework that co-evolves prompts and training data and establishes failures as a shared interface between prompt optimization and data synthesis, and shows the benefit of jointly adapting what a model is instructed to do and what it learns from

Tian-Yu Yuan, Zhu-Zhong Qian · 0 citations

Clustering-based Prompt Optimization for LLM Evaluation

The cluster loop yields the strongest held-out rubric on both evaluator tasks from a commercial search vertical, and is the only method robustly positive on both.

Jinyoung Kim, N. Corp, Sun Kim et al. · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

EvoPrompt-ELO: automated large-scale prompt generation via ELO-guided evolutionary optimization

Abstract High construction costs and unstable evaluation signals remain challenges in cross-task prompt engineering. Existing methods struggle with diversity maintenance at scale. To address these issues, this paper proposes EvoPrompt-ELO, an automated prompt-generation framework based on evolutionary strategies and EL...

Xiao-Bin Huang · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

SEPO: Evidence-Grounded Prompt Optimization via Structural Editing

This paper introduces SEPO (Structural, Evidence-grounded Prompt Optimization), a multi-trajectory prompt optimiser centred on edit-effect lineage feedback that makes prompt optimisation addressable, attributable, and actionable.

Xiao-Yu Ma, Hao-Yue Liu, Yiwen Li et al. · 1 citation
Aug 2026

PRISM: stable black-box prompt optimization via multi-sampling and semantic consensus

PRISM is a stable model-agnostic framework that treats prompt optimization as a multi-candidate selection process instead of single-shot refinement, enabling more stable improvements and demonstrating the effectiveness of PRISM in practical settings.

Tuan-Anh Pham, C. Nguyen, Anh Tran Duc Nguyen et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Oct 2026

How Should a Prompt Optimizer Spend a Tight Budget? BudgetAPO with Noise-Adaptive Evaluation

Automatic prompt optimization (APO) has been widely employed to adapt large language models without updating their weights, yielding promising results. However, existing methods such as GEPA and OPRO assume hundreds to thousands of subject-model calls, far more than is practical behind paid, rate-limited APIs. Under ti...

Hao-Yue Liu, Zhi-Chao Wang, Huan-Yu Yan et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

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