The DOI matches its DataCite record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interactive and Visual Prompt Engineering for Ad-hoc Task Adaptation with Large Language Models
Open accessAbstract
State-of-the-art neural language models can now be used to solve ad-hoc language tasks through zero-shot prompting without the need for supervised training. This approach has gained popularity in recent years, and researchers have demonstrated prompts that achieve strong accuracy on specific NLP tasks. However, finding a prompt for new tasks requires experimentation. Different prompt templates with different wording choices lead to significant accuracy differences. PromptIDE allows users to experiment with prompt variations, visualize prompt performance, and iteratively optimize prompts. We developed a workflow that allows users to first focus on model feedback using small data before moving on to a large data regime that allows empirical grounding of promising prompts using quantitative measures of the task. The tool then allows easy deployment of the newly created ad-hoc models. We demonstrate the utility of PromptIDE (demo at http://prompt.vizhub.ai) and our workflow using several real-world use cases.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“While our work and these approaches hold the same goal of supporting iteration with LLMs, they focused only on the input component of the generative process-e.g., users cannot test model parameters in PromptIDE [83].”
From Cells, Generators, and Lenses: Design Framework for Object-Oriented Interaction with Large Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as [83]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372
Chain-Of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q. V., & Zhou, D. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-1800 · Cited by 4,505
Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text ClassificationPreprint
Zhang, X., Zhao, J., & LeCun, Y. (2015) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1509.01626 · Cited by 4,481
Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3560815 · Cited by 4,361
Liu, P., Yuan, W., Fu, J., Jiang, Z., Hayashi, H., & Neubig, G. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.13586 · Cited by 4,352 · cited 1×
“For more examples see a recent survey by Liu et al. [21].”
Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q., & Zhou, D. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2201.11903 · Cited by 4,263
The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuning
Lester, B., Al-Rfou, R., & Constant, N. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.243 · Cited by 3,096
Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generation
Li, X. L., & Liang, P. (2021) · Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.353 · Cited by 2,473
The PASCAL Recognising Textual Entailment Challenge
Dagan, I., Glickman, O., & Magnini, B. (2006) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/11736790_9 · Cited by 1,674
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Q. Lhoest, A. Villanova del Moral, Y. Jernite, A. Thakur, P. von Platen, S. Patil, J. Chaumond, M. Drame, J. Plu, L. Tunstall, J. Davison, M. Šaško, G. Chhablani, B. Malik, S. Brandeis, T. Le Scao, V. Sanh, C. Xu, N. Patry, A. McMillan-Major, P. Schmid, S. Gugger, C. Delangue, T. Matussière, L. Debut, S. Bekman, P. Cistac, T. Goehringer, V. Mustar, F. Lagunas, A. Rush, and T. Wolf. Datasets: A community library for natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations, pp. 175-184. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online and Punta Cana, Do- minican Republic, Nov. 2021. doi: 10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-demo.21 · DOI · Paper page
- A. Pearce. What have language models learned? VISxAI Workshop 2021, https://pair.withgoogle.com/explorables/ fill-in-the-blank/, Jul 2021.
- O. Popescu and C. Strapparava. Natural language processing meets jour- nalism. In Proceedings of the 2017 EMNLP Workshop. Copenhagen, Denmark: Association for Computational Linguistics.-2017, 2017.
- A. Radford, J. Wu, R. Child, D. Luan, D. Amodei, I. Sutskever, et al. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog, 1(8):9, 2019.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Feuerriegel, S., Hartmann, J., Janiesch, C., & Zschech, P. (2024) · Business & Information Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s12599-023-00834-7 · Cited by 2,267
Why Johnny Can’t Prompt: How Non-AI Experts Try (and Fail) to Design LLM Prompts
Zamfirescu-Pereira, J. D., Wong, R. Y., Hartmann, B., & Yang, Q. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581388 · Cited by 1,274
Adapted large language models can outperform medical experts in clinical text summarization
Van Veen, D., Van Uden, C., Blankemeier, L., Delbrouck, J.-B., Aali, A., Bluethgen, C., Pareek, A., Polacin, M., Reis, E. P., Seehofnerová, A., et al. (2024) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-02855-5 · Cited by 891
AI-generated feedback on writing: insights into efficacy and ENL student preference
Escalante, J., Pack, A., & Barrett, A. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-023-00425-2 · Cited by 589
Using cognitive psychology to understand GPT-3
Binz, M., & Schulz, E. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2218523120 · Cited by 559
Metadata
- Authors
- Strobelt, H., Webson, A., Sanh, V., Hoover, B., Beyer, J., Pfister, H., & Rush, A. M.
- Affiliations
- IBM (United States) (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Hugging Face (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2022
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-11
- ISSN
- 1077-2626 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2208.07852
- OpenAlex
- W4301393026
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 78 · 2023: 35
- FWCI
- 15.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1901030)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Data Visualization and Analytics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- prompt engineering, zero-shot prompting, large language models, interactive visualization, prompt optimization, prompt templates, visual analytics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
