The DOI matches its DataCite record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
In-context Learning with Retrieved Demonstrations for Language Models: A Survey
Open accessAbstract
Language models, especially pre-trained large language models, have showcased remarkable abilities as few-shot in-context learners (ICL), adept at adapting to new tasks with just a few demonstrations in the input context. However, the model's ability to perform ICL is sensitive to the choice of the few-shot demonstrations. Instead of using a fixed set of demonstrations, one recent development is to retrieve demonstrations tailored to each input query. The implementation of demonstration retrieval is relatively straightforward, leveraging existing databases and retrieval systems. This not only improves the efficiency and scalability of the learning process but also has been shown to reduce biases inherent in manual example selection. In light of the encouraging results and growing research in ICL with retrieved demonstrations, we conduct an extensive review of studies in this area. In this survey, we discuss and compare different design choices for retrieval models, retrieval training procedures, and inference algorithms.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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
“In-context learning (ICL) provides an effective and efficient solution of integrating new domain-specific knowledge into off-the-shelf LLMs without additional training by directly incorporating task exemplars into the input context [16].”
From Post-Incorporating Code Structural Knowledge Into Pretrained Models via ICL for Code Translation (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“Traditional ICL exemplar selection strategies often overlook code translation tasks and fail to consider the critical syntactic information inherent in source code [16].”
From Post-Incorporating Code Structural Knowledge Into Pretrained Models via ICL for Code Translation (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“Traditional ICL exemplar selection relies on two main criteria: similarity and diversity [16].”
From Post-Incorporating Code Structural Knowledge Into Pretrained Models via ICL for Code Translation (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“Mostly ICL exemplar selection typically relies on point-wise similarity [17]-[19], [66], [67], where a matching score is computed between each candidate exemplar and the input query, followed by the independent selection of the topk exemplars to construct the context [16].”
From Post-Incorporating Code Structural Knowledge Into Pretrained Models via ICL for Code Translation (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“Although these methods are straightforward and fast, they fail to consider compositional relationships among the selected k exemplars, often leading to redundancy caused by homogeneity.”
From Post-Incorporating Code Structural Knowledge Into Pretrained Models via ICL for Code Translation (2025) · cites this paper as [16]
Citations
Cites
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805 · Cited by 73,173
SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text
Rajpurkar, P., Zhang, J., Lopyrev, K., & Liang, P. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d16-1264 · Cited by 6,208
Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivity
Lu, Y., Bartolo, M., Moore, A., Riedel, S., & Stenetorp, P. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.08786 · Cited by 615 · cited 2×
“Various retrieval objectives for selecting and tailoring in-context examples for LLMs have been explored (Luo et al., 2023; Rubin et al., 2022; Ye et al., 2023a; Dalvi et al., 2022; Cheng et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023).”
Background
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
Assessing Empathy in Large Language Models with Real-World Physician-Patient Interactions
Luo, M., Warren, C. J., Cheng, L., Abdul-Muhsin, H. M., & Banerjee, I. (2024) · 2024 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata62323.2024.10825307 · Cited by 36
Self-citationHow Memory Management Impacts LLM Agents: An Empirical Study of Experience-Following Behavior
Xiong, Z., Lin, Y., Xie, W., He, P., Liu, Z., Tang, J., Lakkaraju, H., & Xiang, Z. (2026) · Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.27 · Cited by 4
Post-Incorporating Code Structural Knowledge Into Pretrained Models via ICL for Code Translation
Du, Y., Sun, H., & Li, M. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2025.3605768
Metadata
- Authors
- Luo, M., Xu, X., Liu, Y., Pasupat, P., & Kazemi, M.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Google (United States) (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2401.11624
- OpenAlex
- W4391211792
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 5
- 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 › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- in-context learning, demonstration retrieval, large language models, few-shot learning, retrieval models, inference algorithms
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
