Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Products

aiqbench analysis

This study evaluates the efficacy of LoRA fine-tuning on Qwen models for generating structured, pedagogically aligned responses in linear control systems courses. Results indicate that while higher LoRA ranks improve textual similarity and output stability, r=8 offers a superior balance between performance gains and parameter efficiency for specialized engineering domains. The findings highlight the potential of adapting open-source LLMs to maintain rigorous mathematical notation and stepwise derivation formats essential for technical education.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

LoRA Fine-Tuned Models for Control Systems Course Q\&A: A Multidimensional Evaluation of Model Scale and Rank Effects

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2609.13918v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in specialized university courses, but control-systems questions require coordinated terminology, notation, derivations, and stepwise explanations. Direct general-purpose responses may be inconsistently structured and hard to verify. Using exercises and reference solutions from a Linear Control Systems course, we built a supervised fine-tuning dataset of 360 system-user-assistant conversations. We applied LoRA to Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct. With identical data splits, inference settings, and evaluation protocols, we compared base and fine-tuned models and tested LoRA ranks r=4, 8, and 16. Evaluation used ROUGE, BERTScore, and structured-output features to measure reference-answer similarity and stability of the Solution-Method-Teaching Points format. LoRA improved both similarity and structured-output stability at both sizes. On the current test set, 7B-r16 achieved the highest ROUGE-L (0.4093) and BERTScore-F1 (0.8643), while r=8 offered a better balance between performance and parameter efficiency. Bootstrap resampling showed ROUGE-L gains of 0.0764 [0.0613, 0.0915] for 3B-r16 and 0.0874 [0.0687, 0.1042] for 7B-r16; both intervals exceeded zero, indicating stable textual-similarity improvements on the current test set. These results suggest LoRA can align open-source instruction-tuned models more closely with the language and pedagogical organization of course reference answers. However, the metrics mainly capture textual similarity and formatting consistency, not domain-specific reasoning or mathematical correctness, which require expert assessment and task-specific rubrics.

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in specialized university courses, but control-systems questions require coordinated terminology, notation, derivations, and stepwise explanations. Direct general-purpose responses may be inconsistently structured and hard to verify. Using exercises and reference solutions from a Linear Control Systems course, we built a supervised fine-tuning dataset of 360 system-user-assistant conversations. We applied LoRA to Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct. With identical data splits, inference settings, and evaluation protocols, we compared base and fine-tuned models and tested LoRA ranks r=4, 8, and 16. Evaluation used ROUGE, BERTScore, and structured-output features to measure reference-answer similarity and stability of the Solution-Method-Teaching Points format. LoRA improved both similarity and structured-output stability at both sizes. On the current test set, 7B-r16 achieved the highest ROUGE-L (0.4093) and BERTScore-F1 (0.8643), while r=8 offered a better balance between performance and parameter efficiency. Bootstrap resampling showed ROUGE-L gains of 0.0764 [0.0613, 0.0915] for 3B-r16 and 0.0874 [0.0687, 0.1042] for 7B-r16; both intervals exceeded zero, indicating stable textual-similarity improvements on the current test set. These results suggest LoRA can align open-source instruction-tuned models more closely with the language and pedagogical organization of course reference answers. However, the metrics mainly capture textual similarity and formatting consistency, not domain-specific reasoning or mathematical correctness, which require expert assessment and task-specific rubrics.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Systems and Control (eess.SY)

arXiv:2609.13918 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2609.13918v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.13918 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 · 309 words

Related coverage