Skip to content

Drift-Constrained Optimization: Only Direction Matters in Fine-Tuning Instruct Models

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 54 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The results suggest that fine-tuning is not just about how much a model changes, but how that change is spent, and that changing the accessible directions can qualitatively alter the outcome of fine-tuning.

Abstract

Fine-tuning instruct models often improves target performance while inducing behavioral drift from the reference model, which can degrade existing capabilities. Rather than treating this drift as an uncontrolled consequence of optimization, we specify a behavioral drift budget before optimization and ask how to boost the target-task performance within it. Locally, behavioral drift induces a shared geometry anchored at the reference model, with the drift budget defining a boundary within this space. In this space, drift determines distance from the reference, leaving update direction as the remaining degree of freedom. Fine-tuning updates can therefore be compared through their directional efficiency, naturally reformulating fine-tuning as a direction-selection problem. This reformulation makes a concrete prediction: changing the accessible directions can qualitatively alter the outcome of fine-tuning. We test this prediction in a stringent QA-only setting, where strong instruct models are fine-tuned only on final answers but must still generate multi-step reasoning at inference. Despite this mismatch, a coarse layer-selective probe reverses the failure of QA-only fine-tuning and reveals the existence of effective directions, with multiple neighboring configurations improving target performance while preserving reasoning and general capabilities. Across Qwen3-8B and Qwen3-14B, these directions substantially improve scientific reasoning and multilingual translation. Over more than 100 languages, the resulting models match or outperform dedicated translation systems and provide a stronger initialization for subsequent reinforcement learning. Our results suggest that fine-tuning is not just about how much a model changes, but how that change is spent. https://github.com/CONE-MT/DCO and https://huggingface.co/collections/LLaMAX/dco

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Compute-Optimal Pretrain--Fine-tune in Ridge Gradient Descent

This paper characterise the optimal split under data-dependent evaluation geometries induced by the fine-tuning problem as a compute-split problem under a two-stage pretrain--fine-tune procedure with fixed total optimisation budget, using regularised least squares trained by gradient descent as a tractable setting.

Alex Buna, Fang-Hui Liu, Patrick Rebeschini · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Beyond Average Safety: Chance-Constrained LLM Fine-tuning

This work proposes a chance-constrained formulation for safety-preserving fine-tuning that limits the fraction of safety examples whose degradation relative to a reference model exceeds a prescribed threshold and develops a constraint-aware gradient descent method that treats the majorized constraint as a safe set in p...

Taha Entesari, Mahyar Fazlyab · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Beyond the Stability-Exploration Dilemma: Environmental Regularization for LLM Policy Optimization

Environment-Regularized Policy Optimization (ERPO) replaces the standard Policy-KL regularizer while achieving effective control over query distribution drift, delivering stronger accuracy and substantially more stable behavior under high-temperature decoding and long-horizon training.

Xianlei Zhou, Xiangdi Meng, Yu He et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Weightless Fine-Tuning: Personalizing LLMs via Logit-Space Transport

Weightless Fine-Tuning is proposed, a training-free decoding-time method that approximates the distributional effect of SFT without weight updates and achieves the best average performance across datasets, matches or exceeds SFT on individual tasks, and outperforms other lightweight baselines on average.

Bo-Han Zhang, An-Qi Ni, Yi-Xin Wang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Manifold Drift in Flow Preference Optimization: A Root Cause of Reward Hacking

Preference optimization is a standard alignment method for generative models, yet extending it to continuous-time dynamics remains non-trivial. In flow matching, reward-driven updates modify transport trajectories without an inherent constraint to the pretrained data manifold and can move terminal samples off the pretr...

Yan-Sen Han, Shengyi Liao, Yuan-Xing Zhang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

TailSFT: Filtered Fine-Tuning Improves Post-Training Performance

A simple modification to supervised fine-tuning, TailSFT, which filters out already fit sequences during training, thereby focusing learning on under-modeled regions, or the tail, of the data distribution, and introduces a lightweight diagnostic for identifying settings where TailSFT is most likely to help.

Sadhika Malladi, Samy Jelassi, Dylan J. Foster et al. · 3 citations

Related blog posts

Hugging Face Blog Oct 20, 2026

MPS in PyTorch 2.15

We’re on a journey to advance and democratize artificial intelligence through open source and open science.

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