aiqbench analysis
This research demonstrates that for closed-book QA tasks using LoRA adapters, the quality of curated training data significantly outperforms architectural tweaks or increased model capacity once a minimum threshold is met. The study provides empirical evidence that internalizing documents directly into weights can surpass standard retrieval-augmented generation pipelines in both accuracy and latency when high-quality curation is applied.
Data Quality over Capacity: Internalizing Documents into LoRA Adapters for Closed-Book QA
arXiv:2607.21861v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We study baking documents directly into the weights of a 4-bit Gemma-4-e4b model via LoRA, so a system can answer questions about a corpus closed-book: no retrieval and no context-window budget. Across roughly 100 training runs from single documents to a 99-document corpus, we find that once adapter capacity is adequate, training-data quality is the dominant lever on closed-book accuracy, outweighing LoRA rank, learning rate, and two alternative architectures combined; capacity itself is a hard gate below which no data intervention helps. A single curation pass (shortening gold answers to canonical 1-6 word spans and dropping trivia) moved closed-book accuracy from 57.7% to 85.7% on a 15-document corpus, a larger jump than any architectural change. We confirm a capacity trend (rank must grow with corpus size) entangled with a coupling between rank and learning rate that we initially misdiagnosed. On a 15-document slice we add a real retrieval baseline: the internalized adapter (84.2% recall) beats a BM25-RAG pipeline with a base reader (58.9%) and even a realistic gold-chunk oracle (65.6%) at lower latency. We report the full arc, including three misdiagnoses, as a case study in debugging LLM training empirically.
Abstract:We study baking documents directly into the weights of a 4-bit Gemma-4-e4b model via LoRA, so a system can answer questions about a corpus closed-book: no retrieval and no context-window budget. Across roughly 100 training runs from single documents to a 99-document corpus, we find that once adapter capacity is adequate, training-data quality is the dominant lever on closed-book accuracy, outweighing LoRA rank, learning rate, and two alternative architectures combined; capacity itself is a hard gate below which no data intervention helps. A single curation pass (shortening gold answers to canonical 1-6 word spans and dropping trivia) moved closed-book accuracy from 57.7% to 85.7% on a 15-document corpus, a larger jump than any architectural change. We confirm a capacity trend (rank must grow with corpus size) entangled with a coupling between rank and learning rate that we initially misdiagnosed. On a 15-document slice we add a real retrieval baseline: the internalized adapter (84.2% recall) beats a BM25-RAG pipeline with a base reader (58.9%) and even a realistic gold-chunk oracle (65.6%) at lower latency. We report the full arc, including three misdiagnoses, as a case study in debugging LLM training empirically.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2607.21861 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2607.21861v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.21861 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 288 words
Related coverage

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 10, 2026

Reducing medical claims review time with AI on AWS: The EXL Medical IDP solution
AWS · Sep 21, 2026

The art and science of hyperparameter optimization on Amazon Nova Forge
AWS · Jun 2, 2026

Hint-based CoT faithfulness evals still mostly work on Claude
LessWrong · Jul 30, 2026