Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
- Stars
- 5
- Last push
- Mar 10, 2026 (37d ago)
Risk flags
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Robert Belanec, Branislav Pecher, Ivan Srba, Maria Bielikova
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Despite the state-of-the-art performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) achieved on many tasks, their massive scale often leads to high computational and environmental costs, limiting their accessibility. Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) methods address this challenge by reducing the number of trainable parameters while maintaining strong downstream performance. Despite the advances in PEFT methods, current ev ...
aluations remain limited (in terms of evaluated models and datasets) and difficult to reproduce. To bridge this gap, we introduce PEFT-Bench, a unified end-to-end benchmark for evaluating diverse PEFT methods on autoregressive LLMs. We demonstrate its usage across 27 NLP datasets and 7 PEFT methods. To account for different PEFT training and inference factors, we also introduce the PEFT Soft Cost Penalties (PSCP) metric, which takes trainable parameters, inference speed, and training memory usage into account.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LoRA | GLUE | F1 | 59.2 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Despite the state-of-the-art performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) achieved on many tasks, their massive scale often leads to high computational and environmental costs, limiting their accessibility.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware 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.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No additional official repositories detected.
A unified benchmark for parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods
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
LoRA
Methods
LoRA / Parameter-efficient tuning
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.