Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This study investigates the functional boundaries of weight-space composition in large language models, revealing that task vector arithmetic is highly sensitive to input prompts and instruction templates rather than being a universal property of the merged weights. The findings demonstrate that performance interactions observed on specific benchmarks can vanish or reverse depending on the prompt format used for evaluation, challenging the assumption of additive skill merging across different reasoning domains. Consequently, researchers must account for input-conditioned variability when interpreting results from model composition techniques like LoRA and full fine-tuning.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

When Do Task Vectors Interfere? Mapping the Validity Boundaries of Weight-Space Composition

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.09490v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Task arithmetic composes skills by adding weight displacements, and merged models are then judged on benchmark suites. We measure when that composition is functionally additive, and find that the answer depends as much on how the model is prompted as on which tasks are merged. Across two-dimensional composition surfaces -- five model settings from 0.5B to 8B, two families, LoRA and full fine-tuning -- pairwise non-additivity is real, seed-stable, and transfers in coarse order to unseen task pairs: all eight preregistered sign predictions held. But it is input-conditioned everywhere we measured: the same merged model that shows a six-point interaction contrast on code prompts shows none on math prompts, and wrapping the identical code prompts in the instruction template the adapters were trained on collapses the contrast twenty-fold, from +6.9 to +0.3 points -- while re-serializing them in an untrained chat template leaves it intact (+12.5), falsifying our own preregistered prediction. Execution benchmarks (pass@1) inherit the training-format wrapper's blindness. Weight-space composition therefore supports coarse, input- and format-conditioned functional statements -- not a universal merging-performance predictor, and not one that training-format evaluations can see.

Title:When Do Task Vectors Interfere? Mapping the Validity Boundaries of Weight-Space Composition

Abstract:Task arithmetic composes skills by adding weight displacements, and merged models are then judged on benchmark suites. We measure when that composition is functionally additive, and find that the answer depends as much on how the model is prompted as on which tasks are merged. Across two-dimensional composition surfaces -- five model settings from 0.5B to 8B, two families, LoRA and full fine-tuning -- pairwise non-additivity is real, seed-stable, and transfers in coarse order to unseen task pairs: all eight preregistered sign predictions held. But it is input-conditioned everywhere we measured: the same merged model that shows a six-point interaction contrast on code prompts shows none on math prompts, and wrapping the identical code prompts in the instruction template the adapters were trained on collapses the contrast twenty-fold, from +6.9 to +0.3 points -- while re-serializing them in an untrained chat template leaves it intact (+12.5), falsifying our own preregistered prediction. Execution benchmarks (pass@1) inherit the training-format wrapper's blindness. Weight-space composition therefore supports coarse, input- and format-conditioned functional statements -- not a universal merging-performance predictor, and not one that training-format evaluations can see.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2608.09490 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.09490v2 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.09490 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

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 · 287 words

Related coverage