Larger language models do in-context learning differently
Open accessAbstract
We study how in-context learning (ICL) in language models is affected by semantic priors versus input-label mappings. We investigate two setups-ICL with flipped labels and ICL with semantically-unrelated labels-across various model families (GPT-3, InstructGPT, Codex, PaLM, and Flan-PaLM). First, experiments on ICL with flipped labels show that overriding semantic priors is an emergent ability of model scale. While small language models ignore flipped labels presented in-context and thus rely primarily on semantic priors from pretraining, large models can override semantic priors when presented with in-context exemplars that contradict priors, despite the stronger semantic priors that larger models may hold. We next study semantically-unrelated label ICL (SUL-ICL), in which labels are semantically unrelated to their inputs (e.g., foo/bar instead of negative/positive), thereby forcing language models to learn the input-label mappings shown in in-context exemplars in order to perform the task. The ability to do SUL-ICL also emerges primarily with scale, and large-enough language models can even perform linear classification in a SUL-ICL setting. Finally, we evaluate instruction-tuned models and find that instruction tuning strengthens both the use of semantic priors and the capacity to learn input-label mappings, but more of the former.
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
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?
Smaller language models commonly ignore false in-context labels, but larger models can detect consistent label misspecification and produce more falsehoods.
“Such unwanted behavior may only emerge at scale-for example, smaller language models commonly ignore false in-context labels, but larger models can detect this consistent label misspecification and produce more falsehoods [Wei et al., 2023, Halawi et al., 2023].”
From The alignment problem from a deep learning perspective (2022) · cites this paper as Wei et al., 2023
Section 3 reports that small models often maintain their performance when in-context labels are flipped, while large models follow the flipped mappings and make more incorrect classification predictions. The paper does not show that larger models recognize the labels as false or produce more falsehoods beyond these classification tasks. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredLLMs are sensitive to the prompt format.
“LLMs are shown to be sensitive to the prompt format (Zhao et al., 2021;Lu et al., 2021;Wei et al., 2023;Madaan & Yazdanbakhsh, 2022)”
From Large Language Models as Optimizers (2023) · cites this paper as Wei et al., 2023
In Appendix B.4 (page unavailable), changing to semantically relevant prompt templates reduced performance for the smallest Codex model, supporting sensitivity to prompt format in that setting. But the largest model was relatively unaffected, and the paper found no significant advantage among the simple input–label formats tested. The unqualified claim is broader than these results. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMapping original natural language labels into numbered labels tests how well a model can learn new tasks instead of relying on its pre-trained priors.
“One difference from previous works is that we map original natural language labels (e.g., location ) into numbered labels (i.e., 0 , 1 ) to test how well a model can learn new tasks instead of relying on its pre-trained priors (Wei et al., 2023; Pan et al., 2023; Min et al., 2022).”
From HELMET: How to Evaluate Long-Context Language Models Effectively and Thoroughly (2024) · cites this paper as Wei et al., 2023
LLMs are able to recognize patterns from in-context demonstrations.
“LLMs are also shown to be able to recognize patterns from in-context demonstrations (Wei et al., 2023;Madaan & Yazdanbakhsh, 2022;Mirchandani et al., 2023).”
From Large Language Models as Optimizers (2023) · cites this paper as Wei et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 28
- Ekin Akyürek, Dale Schuurmans, Jacob Andreas, Tengyu Ma, and Denny Zhou. What learning algorithm is in-context learning? Investigations with linear models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.15661. · arXiv
- Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D. Kaplan, Prafulla Dhari- wal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. Lan- guage models are few-shot learners. Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020. URL https://papers.nips.cc/paper/2020/hash/ 1457c0d6bfcb4967418bfb8ac142f64a-Abstract.html.
- Stephanie C.Y. Chan, Adam Santoro, Andrew K. Lampinen, Jane X. Wang, Aaditya Singh, Pierre H. Richemond, Jay McClelland, and Felix Hill. Data distributional properties drive emergent few-shot learning in transformers. Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.05055. · arXiv
- Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, et al. Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374, 2021. URL https:// arxiv.org/abs/2107.03374. · arXiv
- Aakanksha Chowdhery, Sharan Narang, Jacob Devlin, Maarten Bosma, Gaurav Mishra, Hyung Won Chung, Charles Sutton, Sebastian Gehrmann, Parker Schuh, et al. PaLM: Scaling language modeling with Pathways. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02311, 2022. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2204.02311. · arXiv
- Hyung Won Chung, Le Hou, Shayne Longpre, Barret Zoph, Yi Tay, William Fedus, Eric Li, Xuezhi Wang, Mostafa Dehghani, Siddhartha Brahma, et al. Scaling instruction-finetuned language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.11416, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.11416. · arXiv
- Alexis Conneau and Douwe Kiela. SentEval: An evaluation toolkit for universal sentence rep- resentations. Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC), 2018. URL http: //arxiv.org/abs/1803.05449.
- Ido Dagan, Oren Glickman, and Bernardo Magnini. The PASCAL recognising tex- tual entailment challenge. In First PASCAL Machine Learning Challenges Workshop, 2006. URL https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221366753_The_ PASCAL_recognising_textual_entailment_challenge.
- Damai Dai, Yutao Sun, Li Dong, Yaru Hao, Zhifang Sui, and Furu Wei. Why can GPT learn in-context? Language models secretly perform gradient descent as meta-optimizers, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.10559. · arXiv
- Deep Ganguli, Danny Hernandez, Liane Lovitt, Nova DasSarma, Tom Henighan, Andy Jones, Nicholas Joseph, Jackson Kernion, Ben Mann, Amanda Askell, et al. Predictability and surprise in large generative models. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT), 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.07785. · arXiv
- Shivam Garg, Dimitris Tsipras, Percy Liang, and Gregory Valiant. What can transformers learn in-context? A case study of simple function classes, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2208.01066.
- Yoon Kim. Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). Association for Computational Linguistics, 2014. URL https://aclanthology.org/D14-1181.
- Laria Reynolds and Kyle McDonell. Prompt programming for large language models: Beyond the few-shot paradigm. Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.07350. · arXiv
- Richard Socher, Alex Perelygin, Jean Wu, Jason Chuang, Christopher D. Manning, Andrew Ng, and Christopher Potts. Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), 2013. URL https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/D13-1170.
- Aarohi Srivastava, Abhinav Rastogi, Abhishek Rao, Abu Awal Md Shoeb, Abubakar Abid, Adam Fisch, Adam R Brown, Adam Santoro, Aditya Gupta, Adrià Garriga-Alonso, et al. Beyond the imitation game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.04615. · arXiv
- Dustin Tran, Jeremiah Liu, Michael W. Dusenberry, Du Phan, Mark Collier, Jie Ren, Kehang Han, Zi Wang, Zelda Mariet, Huiyi Hu, Neil Band, Tim G. J. Rudner, Karan Singhal, Zachary Nado, Joost van Amersfoort, Andreas Kirsch, Rodolphe Jenatton, Nithum Thain, Honglin Yuan, Kelly Buchanan, Kevin Murphy, D. Sculley, Yarin Gal, Zoubin Ghahramani, Jasper Snoek, and Balaji Lakshminarayanan. Plex: Towards reliability using pretrained large model extensions, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.07411. · arXiv
- Johannes von Oswald, Eyvind Niklasson, Ettore Randazzo, João Sacramento, Alexander Mordvintsev, Andrey Zhmoginov, and Max Vladymyrov. Transformers learn in-context by gradient descent, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.07677. · arXiv
- Alex Wang, Amanpreet Singh, Julian Michael, Felix Hill, Omer Levy, and Samuel R. Bowman. GLUE: A multi-task benchmark and analysis platform for natural language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2018 EMNLP Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP, 2018. URL https://aclanthology.org/W18-5446.
- Alex Wang, Yada Pruksachatkun, Nikita Nangia, Amanpreet Singh, Julian Michael, Felix Hill, Omer Levy, and Samuel Bowman. SuperGLUE: A stickier benchmark for general-purpose language understanding systems. Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.00537. · arXiv
- Boshi Wang, Sewon Min, Xiang Deng, Jiaming Shen, You Wu, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Huan Sun. Towards understanding chain-of-thought prompting: An empirical study of what matters. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10001, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.10001. · arXiv
- Xuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc V Le, Ed H. Chi, Sharan Narang, Aakanksha Chowdhery, and Denny Zhou. Self-consistency improves chain of thought reasoning in language models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023. URL https: //openreview.net/forum?id=1PL1NIMMrw.
- Albert Webson and Ellie Pavlick. Do prompt-based models really understand the meaning of their prompts? In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL): Human Language Technologies, 2022. URL https://aclanthology.org/2022.naacl-main.167.
- Jason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu, Adams Wei Yu, Brian Lester, Nan Du, Andrew M. Dai, and Quoc V. Le. Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2022a. URL https://openreview.net/ forum?id=gEZrGCozdqR.
- Jason Wei, Yi Tay, Rishi Bommasani, Colin Raffel, Barret Zoph, Sebastian Borgeaud, Dani Yogatama, Maarten Bosma, Denny Zhou, Donald Metzler, Ed H. Chi, Tatsunori Hashimoto, Oriol Vinyals, Percy Liang, Jeff Dean, and William Fedus. Emergent abilities of large lan- guage models. Transactions on Machine Learning Research (TMLR), 2022b. URL https: //openreview.net/forum?id=yzkSU5zdwD.
- Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Ed Chi, Quoc Le, and Denny Zhou. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022c. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2201. 11903.
- Sang Michael Xie, Aditi Raghunathan, Percy Liang, and Tengyu Ma. An explanation of in-context learning as implicit bayesian inference. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.02080. · arXiv
- Zihao Zhao, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Dan Klein, and Sameer Singh. Calibrate before use: Improving few-shot performance of language models. International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.09690. · arXiv
- Denny Zhou, Nathanael Schärli, Le Hou, Jason Wei, Nathan Scales, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Olivier Bousquet, Quoc Le, and Ed Chi. Least-to-most prompting enables complex reasoning in large language models. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.10625. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on In-context Learning
Dong, Q., Li, L., Dai, D., Zheng, C., Ma, J., Li, R., Xia, H., Xu, J., Wu, Z., Chang, B., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.64 · Cited by 649 · see citing works
Survey on large language model-enhanced reinforcement learning: Concept, taxonomy, and methods
Cao, Y., Zhao, H., Cheng, Y., Shu, T., Chen, Y., Liu, G., Liang, G., Zhao, J., Yan, J., & Li, Y. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2024.3497992 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Guan, T., Liu, F., Wu, X., Xian, R., Li, Z., Liu, X., Wang, X., Chen, L., Huang, F., Yacoob, Y., et al. (2024) · 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.01363 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Large Language Models as Optimizers
Yang, C., Wang, X., Lu, Y., Liu, H., Le, Q. V., Zhou, D., & Chen, X. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.03409 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Self-citationTowards Understanding Chain-of-Thought Prompting: An Empirical Study of What Matters
Wang, B., Min, S., Deng, X., Shen, J., Wu, Y., Zettlemoyer, L., & Sun, H. (2023) · Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.153 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
The alignment problem from a deep learning perspective
Ngo, R., Chan, L., & Mindermann, S. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2209.00626 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
“Such unwanted behavior may only emerge at scale—for example, smaller language models commonly ignore false in-context labels, but larger models can detect this consistent label misspecification and produce more falsehoods [Wei et al., 2023, Halawi et al., 2023].”
BackgroundLong-form factuality in large language models
Wei, J., Yang, C., Song, X., Lu, Y., Hu, N., Huang, J., Tran, D., Peng, D., Liu, R., Huang, D., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.18802 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Self-citationSeger, E., Dreksler, N., Moulange, R., Dardaman, E., Schuett, J., Wei, K., Winter, C., Arnold, M., Ó hÉigeartaigh, S., Korinek, A., et al. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4596436 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
A psychometric framework for evaluating and shaping personality traits in large language models
Serapio-García, G., Safdari, M., Crepy, C., Sun, L., Fitz, S., Romero, P., Abdulhai, M., Faust, A., & Matarić, M. (2025) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-025-01115-6 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
What In-Context Learning “Learns” In-Context: Disentangling Task Recognition and Task Learning
Pan, J., Gao, T., Chen, H., & Chen, D. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.527 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Are Emergent Abilities in Large Language Models just In-Context Learning?
Lu, S., Bigoulaeva, I., Sachdeva, R., Madabushi, H. T., & Gurevych, I. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.01809 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Agarwal, R., Singh, A., Zhang, L. M., Bohnet, B., Rosias, L., Chan, S., Zhang, B., Anand, A., Abbas, Z., Nova, A., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.11018 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“While Wei et al. [61] used only 16 shots per class, we scale ICL up to 2048 shots per class.”
tinyBenchmarks: evaluating LLMs with fewer examples
Polo, F. M., Weber, L., Choshen, L., Sun, Y., Xu, G., & Yurochkin, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.14992 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“Prompt evaluation A persistent challenge in prompt-based model evaluation is the influence the prompting setup has on model predictions (see, e.g. , Lu et al., 2022; Mishra et al., 2022; Min et al., 2022; Yoo et al., 2022; Weber et al., 2023b; Wei et al., 2023).”
BackgroundBirch, J. (2024) · The Edge of Sentience · doi:10.1093/9780191966729.003.0003 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
HELMET: How to Evaluate Long-Context Language Models Effectively and Thoroughly
Yen, H., Gao, T., Hou, M., Ding, K., Fleischer, D., Izsak, P., Wasserblat, M., & Chen, D. (2024) · arXiv · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“One difference from previous works is that we map original natural language labels (e.g., location ) into numbered labels (i.e., 0 , 1 ) to test how well a model can learn new tasks instead of relying on its pre-trained priors (Wei et al., 2023; Pan et al., 2023; Min et al., 2022).”
Background
- Authors
- Wei, J., Wei, J., Tay, Y., Tran, D., Webson, A., Lu, Y., Chen, X., Liu, H., Huang, D., Zhou, D., & Ma, T.
- Affiliations
- Google (United States) (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2303.03846
- OpenAlex
- W4323697341
- Cited by
- 109
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 32
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- in-context learning, large language models, semantic priors, model scale, instruction tuning, linear classification, GPT-3, Arecaceae, codices
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
