PreprintCited by 1Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

LLM-AutoDiff: Auto-Differentiate Any LLM Workflow

Open access
Yin, Li, Wang, Zhangyang·2025·arXiv

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have reshaped natural language processing, powering applications from multi-hop retrieval and question answering to autonomous agent workflows. Yet, prompt engineering -- the task of crafting textual inputs to effectively direct LLMs -- remains difficult and labor-intensive, particularly for complex pipelines that combine multiple LLM calls with functional operations like retrieval and data formatting. We introduce LLM-AutoDiff: a novel framework for Automatic Prompt Engineering (APE) that extends textual gradient-based methods (such as Text-Grad) to multi-component, potentially cyclic LLM architectures. Implemented within the AdalFlow library, LLM-AutoDiff treats each textual input as a trainable parameter and uses a frozen backward engine LLM to generate feedback-akin to textual gradients -- that guide iterative prompt updates. Unlike prior single-node approaches, LLM-AutoDiff inherently accommodates functional nodes, preserves time-sequential behavior in repeated calls (e.g., multi-hop loops), and combats the "lost-in-the-middle" problem by isolating distinct sub-prompts (instructions, formats, or few-shot examples). It further boosts training efficiency by focusing on error-prone samples through selective gradient computation. Across diverse tasks, including single-step classification, multi-hop retrieval-based QA, and agent-driven pipelines, LLM-AutoDiff consistently outperforms existing textual gradient baselines in both accuracy and training cost. By unifying prompt optimization through a graph-centric lens, LLM-AutoDiff offers a powerful new paradigm for scaling and automating LLM workflows - mirroring the transformative role that automatic differentiation libraries have long played in neural network research.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2501.16673

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • TextGrad, Trace, and LLM-AutoDiff optimize arbitrary text components in chained workflows by back-propagating textual feedback using LLMs.

    “TextGrad [34], Trace [7], and LLM-AutoDiff [32] optimize arbitrary text components in chained workflows by back-propagating textual feedback using LLMs.”

    From HarnessOpt-Bench: Evaluating LLMs at Harness Optimization (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

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: 27

  1. Martín Abadi, Paul Barham, Jianmin Chen, Zhifeng Chen, Andy Davis, Jeffrey Dean, Matthieu Devin, Sanjay Ghemawat, Geoffrey Irving, Michael Isard, et al. {TensorFlow}: a system for {Large-Scale} machine learning. In 12th USENIX symposium on operating systems design and implementation (OSDI 16), pages 265-283, 2016. 3, 5
  2. Tom B Brown. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165, 2020. 1, 4, 5 · arXiv
  3. Mingkai Deng, Jianyu Wang, Cheng-Ping Hsieh, Yihan Wang, Han Guo, Tianmin Shu, Meng Song, Eric P Xing, and Zhiting Hu. Rlprompt: Optimizing discrete text prompts with reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.12548, 2022. 5 · arXiv
  4. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 770-778, 2016. 11
  5. Ajay Kumar Jaiswal, Haoyu Ma, Tianlong Chen, Ying Ding, and Zhangyang Wang. Training your sparse neural network better with any mask. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 9833-9844. PMLR, 2022. 11
  6. Omar Khattab, Keshav Santhanam, Xiang Lisa Li, David Hall, Percy Liang, Christopher Potts, and Matei Zaharia. Demonstrate- search-predict: Composing retrieval and language models for knowledge-intensive nlp. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.14024, 2022. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, 15, 16 · arXiv
  7. Sehoon Kim, Suhong Moon, Ryan Tabrizi, Nicholas Lee, Michael W Mahoney, Kurt Keutzer, and Amir Gholami. An llm compiler for parallel function calling. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning. 1
  8. Patrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni, Vladimir Karpukhin, Naman Goyal, Heinrich Küttler, Mike Lewis, Wen-tau Yih, Tim Rocktäschel, et al. Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks. Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 33:9459-9474, 2020. 2, 4
  9. Xin Li and Dan Roth. Learning question classifiers. In COLING 2002: The 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 2002. 14
  10. Nelson F Liu, Kevin Lin, John Hewitt, Ashwin Paranjape, Michele Bevilacqua, Fabio Petroni, and Percy Liang. Lost in the middle: How language models use long contexts. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 12:157-173, 2024. 2, 4, 12
  11. Krista Opsahl-Ong, Michael J Ryan, Josh Purtell, David Broman, Christopher Potts, Matei Zaharia, and Omar Khattab. Optimizing instructions and demonstrations for multi-stage language model programs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11695, 2024. 5, 15, 16 · arXiv
  12. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, et al. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019. 3, 5
  13. Reid Pryzant, Dan Iter, Jerry Li, Yin Tat Lee, Chenguang Zhu, and Michael Zeng. Automatic prompt optimization with" gradient descent" and beam search. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.03495, 2023. 1, 2, 5 · arXiv
  14. Dragomir R Radev, Hong Qi, Harris Wu, and Weiguo Fan. Evaluating web-based question answering systems. In LREC. Citeseer, 2002. 6
  15. Noah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan, and Shunyu Yao. Reflexion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1, 4
  16. Dilara Soylu, Christopher Potts, and Omar Khattab. Fine-tuning and prompt optimization: Two great steps that work better together. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10930, 2024. 5 · arXiv
  17. 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. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.04615, 2022. 12, 14 · arXiv
  18. Mirac Suzgun, Nathan Scales, Nathanael Schärli, Sebastian Gehrmann, Yi Tay, Hyung Won Chung, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Quoc V Le, Ed H Chi, Denny Zhou, et al. Challenging big-bench tasks and whether chain-of-thought can solve them. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.09261, 2022. 12, 14 · arXiv
  19. Wenyi Wang, Hisham A Alyahya, Dylan R Ashley, Oleg Serikov, Dmitrii Khizbullin, Francesco Faccio, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. How to correctly do semantic backpropagation on language-based agentic systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03624, 2024. 5 · arXiv
  20. Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V Le, Denny Zhou, et al. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:24824-24837, 2022. 1, 4
  21. Chengrun Yang, Xuezhi Wang, Yifeng Lu, Hanxiao Liu, Quoc V Le, Denny Zhou, and Xinyun Chen. Large language models as optimizers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.03409, 2023. 1, 4, 5, 12, 16 · arXiv
  22. Zhilin Yang, Peng Qi, Saizheng Zhang, Yoshua Bengio, William W Cohen, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Christopher D Manning. Hotpotqa: A dataset for diverse, explainable multi-hop question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.09600, 2018. 14, 15 · arXiv
  23. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.03629, 2022. 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 15 · arXiv
  24. Mert Yuksekgonul, Federico Bianchi, Joseph Boen, Sheng Liu, Zhi Huang, Carlos Guestrin, and James Zou. Textgrad: Automatic" differentiation" via text. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.07496, 2024. 1, 2, 5, 8, 11, 15 · arXiv
  25. Tianjun Zhang, Xuezhi Wang, Denny Zhou, Dale Schuurmans, and Joseph E Gonzalez. Tempera: Test-time prompting via reinforce- ment learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.11890, 2022. 5 · arXiv
  26. Lianmin Zheng, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ying Sheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Zhanghao Wu, Yonghao Zhuang, Zi Lin, Zhuohan Li, Dacheng Li, Eric Xing, et al. Judging llm-as-a-judge with mt-bench and chatbot arena. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:46595-46623, 2023. 7, 19
  27. Yongchao Zhou, Andrei Ioan Muresanu, Ziwen Han, Keiran Paster, Silviu Pitis, Harris Chan, and Jimmy Ba. Large language models are human-level prompt engineers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.01910, 2022. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • HarnessOpt-Bench: Evaluating LLMs at Harness Optimization

    Ursekar, V., Shanker, A., Maurya, Y., Yasser, S., Kalmath, V. S., Chatrath, V., & Xue, Y. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.06301

    “TextGrad [34], Trace [7], and LLM-AutoDiff [32] optimize arbitrary text components in chained workflows by back-propagating textual feedback using LLMs. GEPA [1] optimizes textual artifacts by using reflective feedback to guide an evolutionary process.”

Authors
Yin, L., & Wang, Z.
Affiliations
Atlas
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4406954331
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
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 › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
large language models, prompt optimization, multi-hop retrieval, question answering, LLM agents

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