Official implementation from Papers with Code · Repository link is mentioned in the paper metadata
- Stars
- 2
- Last push
- Jan 20, 2026 (144d ago)
Risk flags
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Andrey Goncharov, Daniil Vyazhev, Petr Sychev, Edvard Khalafyan, Alexey Zaytsev
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
General-purpose Large Language Models (LLMs) are frequently fine-tuned through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to enhance performance in specific domains. Better results can be achieved by distilling the chain-of-thought of a larger model at the cost of numerous expensive calls and a much greater amount of data. We propose a novel blueprint for efficient fine-tuning that uses reasoning only for complex data identified b ...
y entropy. Specifically, across three small open models ($\approx 3B$) we split the training data into complexity categories by a single token answer entropy (ROC AUC $0.73$), fine-tune large language models (LLMs) via SFT and distillation, and show that our pipeline significantly outperforms the standard SFT approach ($0.58$ vs $0.45$ average accuracy) and outperforms the distillation approach ($0.58$ vs $0.56$ average accuracy) while using $81\%$ less data.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural language processing | MMLU | Accuracy | 0.39 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Natural language processing | GSM8K | Accuracy | 0.51 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
General-purpose Large Language Models (LLMs) are frequently fine-tuned through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to enhance performance in specific domains.
Only historical official repository was found (labarss/complexity-aware-fine-tuning).
Open labarss/complexity-aware-fine-tuningHardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Official implementation from Papers with Code · Repository link is mentioned in the paper metadata
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
Only a historical official implementation is available.
Use with caution for new projects; verify against current tooling and maintained community alternatives.
Hardware requirements
Dependencies pinned, manual setup needed
Quick start
git clone https://github.com/labarss/complexity-aware-fine-tuning.git
pip install -e . No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Natural language processing
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Natural Language Processing
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.