Feng Shi

Yongkang Liu, Xing Li, Mengjie Zhao et al.

As the number of model parameters increases, parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) has become the go-to choice for tailoring pre-trained large language models. Low-rank Adaptation (LoRA) uses a low-rank update method to simulate full parameter fine-tuning, which is widely used to reduce resource requirements. However, decreasing the rank encounters challenges with limited representational capacity. Theory suggests that LoRA fine-tuning with rank r converges toward the top r singular values of the pre-trained weight matrix. As the rank increases, more principal singular directions are preserved, which generally improves the model's performance. However, a larger rank also introduces more trainable parameters, leading to higher computational cost. To overcome this dilemma, we propose SMoA, a \textbf{S}pectrum \textbf{Mo}dulation \textbf{A}dapter that enlarges the accessible family of spectrum-aware updates under a smaller parameter budget. SMoA partitions the layer into multiple aligned spectral blocks and applies one in-block Hadamard-modulated low-rank branch to each diagonal block, yielding broader coverage of pretrained spectral directions. We provide theoretical analysis and empirical results on multiple tasks. In our experiments, SMoA improves average performance in the current lower-budget setting over LoRA and competitive LoRA-style baselines.

Nishant Balepur, Vishakh Padmakumar, Fumeng Yang et al.

LLMs are aligned to follow input instructions by learning which of two responses users prefer for a prompt. However, such preference data do not convey why users prefer responses that are chosen or rejected, so LLMs trained on these datasets cannot tailor responses to varied user needs. To surface these parameters of personalization, we apply abductive reasoning to preference data, inferring needs and interests of users, i.e., personas, that may prefer either response. We test this idea in two steps: Persona Inference (PI), abductively inferring personas of users who prefer chosen or rejected outputs, and Persona Tailoring (PT), training models to tailor outputs to personas from PI. We show: 1) LLMs infer personas accurately explaining why different users may prefer both chosen or rejected outputs; 2) Training on preference data augmented with PI personas via PT boosts personalization and generalizes to supporting user-written personas; and 3) Rejected response personas form harder personalization evaluations, showing PT better aids users with uncommon preferences versus typical alignment methods. We argue for an abductive view of preferences for personalization, asking not only which response is better but when, why, and for whom.