PreprintCited by 1Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

Cmprsr: Abstractive Token-Level Question-Agnostic Prompt Compressor

Open access
Zakazov, Ivan, Argin, Berke, Gabouj, Oussama, Charaf, Kamel, Sharipov, Alexander, Semiz, Alexi, Drudi, Lorenzo, Baldwin, Nicolas +1 more·2025·arXiv

Abstract

Motivated by the high costs of using black-box Large Language Models (LLMs), we introduce a novel prompt compression paradigm, under which we use smaller LLMs to compress inputs for the larger ones. We present the first comprehensive LLM-as-a-compressor benchmark spanning 25 open- and closed-source models, which reveals significant disparity in models' compression ability in terms of (i) preserving semantically important information (ii) following the user-provided compression rate (CR). We further improve the performance of gpt-4.1-mini, the best overall vanilla compressor, with Textgrad-based compression meta-prompt optimization. We also identify the most promising open-source vanilla LLM - Qwen3-4B - and post-train it with a combination of supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), pursuing the dual objective of CR adherence and maximizing the downstream task performance. We call the resulting model Cmprsr and demonstrate its superiority over both extractive and vanilla abstractive compression across the entire range of compression rates on lengthy inputs from MeetingBank and LongBench as well as short prompts from GSM8k. The latter highlights Cmprsr's generalizability across varying input lengths and domains. Moreover, Cmprsr closely follows the requested compression rate, offering fine control over the cost-quality trade-off.

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.2511.12281

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

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

  • Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models

    Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Henighan, T., Brown, T. B., Chess, B., Child, R., Gray, S., Radford, A., Wu, J., & Amodei, D. (2020) · arXiv · Cited by 1,749 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “The discovery of scaling laws (Kaplan et al., 2020) set the trend for training increasingly large Language Models (LMs).”
  • Optimizing generative AI by backpropagating language model feedback

    Yuksekgonul, M., Bianchi, F., Boen, J., Liu, S., Lu, P., Huang, Z., Guestrin, C., & Zou, J. (2025) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-025-08661-4 · Cited by 85 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Can we further improve their performance with prompt optimization techniques such as (Yuksekgonul et al., 2025)?”
  • Adapting Language Models to Compress Contexts

    Chevalier, A., Wettig, A., Ajith, A., & Chen, D. (2023) · arXiv · Cited by 59 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “According to (Li et al., 2025), prompt compression can also be divided into the following 2 categories: Embedding-level ( a.k.a soft prompt methods (Mu et al., 2023; Chevalier et al., 2023)), which require access to the Target model, and are therefore not viable for the black-box models.”
  • LLMLingua-2: Data Distillation for Efficient and Faithful Task-Agnostic Prompt Compression

    Pan, Z., Wu, Q., Jiang, H., Xia, M., Luo, X., Zhang, J., Lin, Q., Rühle, V., Yang, Y., Lin, C.-Y., et al. (2024) · arXiv · Cited by 2 · cited 12× · see citing works

    “DAC (Target 0.3 / Actual 0.2950): Good. start quarterly the the sales for3 Sarah the numbers?, John Yes so saw5 increase sales compared2 Our enterprise division performed growth our package The SMB grew slightly target%. believe due competition space customer decreased %, excellent margins However churn%, something ad…”
    Influential

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Eunseong Choi, Sunkyung Lee, Minjin Choi, Jun Park, and Jongwuk Lee. 2024. From reading to compressing: Exploring the multi-document reader for prompt compression. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024 , pages 1473414754, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  2. Yu-Neng Chuang, Tianwei Xing, Chia-Yuan Chang, Zirui Liu, Xun Chen, and Xia Hu. 2024. Learning to compress prompt in natural language formats. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages 7756-7767, Mexico City, Mexico. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  3. Yunfan Gao, Yun Xiong, Xinyu Gao, Kangxiang Jia, Jinliu Pan, Yuxi Bi, Yi Dai, Jiawei Sun, Qianyu Guo, Meng Wang, and Haofen Wang. 2023. Retrievalaugmented generation for large language models: A survey. ArXiv , abs/2312.10997. · arXiv
  4. Jinwu Hu, Wei Zhang, Yufeng Wang, Yu Hu, Bin Xiao, Mingkui Tan, and Qing Du. 2025. Dynamic compressing prompts for efficient inference of large language models. Preprint , arXiv:2504.11004. · arXiv
  5. Yebowen Hu, Tim Ganter, Hanieh Deilamsalehy, Franck Dernoncourt, Hassan Foroosh, and Fei Liu. 2023. Meetingbank: A benchmark dataset for meeting summarization. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) , Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  6. Huiqiang Jiang, Qianhui Wu, Chin-Yew Lin, Yuqing Yang, and Lili Qiu. 2023. LLMLingua: Compressing prompts for accelerated inference of large language models. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 13358-13376, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  7. Singon Kim, Gunho Jung, and Seong-Whan Lee. 2025. Acorn: Noise-robust abstractive compression in retrieval-augmented language models. Preprint , arXiv:2504.12673. · arXiv
  8. Daniil Larionov and Steffen Eger. 2025. PromptOptMe: Error-aware prompt compression for LLM-based MT evaluation metrics. In Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages 11807-11820, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  9. Yucheng Li, Bo Dong, Frank Guerin, and Chenghua Lin. 2023. Compressing context to enhance inference efficiency of large language models. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 6342-6353, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  10. Zongqian Li, Yinhong Liu, Yixuan Su, and Nigel Collier. 2025. Prompt compression for large language models: A survey. In Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages 7182-7195, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  11. Weixin Liang, Yaohui Zhang, Mihai Codreanu, Jiayu Wang, Hancheng Cao, and James Zou. 2025. The widespread adoption of large language model-assisted writing across society. Preprint , arXiv:2502.09747. · arXiv
  12. Barys Liskavets, Maxim Ushakov, Shuvendu Roy, Mark Klibanov, Ali Etemad, and Shane K. Luke. 2025. Prompt compression with context-aware sentence encoding for fast and improved llm inference. AAAI'25/IAAI'25/EAAI'25. AAAI Press.
  13. Alexandra Sasha Luccioni, Emma Strubell, and Kate Crawford. 2025. From efficiency gains to rebound effects: The problem of jevons' paradox in ai's polarized environmental debate. In Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency , FAccT '25, page 76-88, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery.
  14. Zhuoshi Pan, Qianhui Wu, Huiqiang Jiang, Menglin Xia, Xufang Luo, Jue Zhang, Qingwei Lin, Victor Ruhle, Yuqing Yang, Chin-Yew Lin, H. Vicky Zhao, Lili Qiu, and Dongmei Zhang. 2024. LLMLingua2: Data distillation for efficient and faithful taskagnostic prompt compression. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 , pages 963-981, Bangkok, Thailand and virtual meeting. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  15. Xiao Pu, Tianxing He, and Xiaojun Wan. 2024. Stylecompress: An LLM-based prompt compression framework considering task-specific styles. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024 , pages 14533-14549, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  16. Shivam Shandilya, Menglin Xia, Supriyo Ghosh, Huiqiang Jiang, Jue Zhang, Qianhui Wu, and Victor Rühle. 2024. Taco-rl: Task aware prompt compression optimization with reinforcement learning. Preprint , arXiv:2409.13035. · arXiv
  17. C. E. Shannon. 1951. Prediction and entropy of printed english. The Bell System Technical Journal , 30(1):5064.
  18. Alexander Shypula, Aman Madaan, Yimeng Zeng, Uri Alon, Jacob R. Gardner, Yiming Yang, Milad Hashemi, Graham Neubig, Parthasarathy Ranganathan, Osbert Bastani, and Amir Yazdanbakhsh. 2024. Learning performance-improving code edits. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations .
  19. Chanwoong Yoon, Taewhoo Lee, Hyeon Hwang, Minbyul Jeong, and Jaewoo Kang. 2024. CompAct: Compressing retrieved documents actively for question answering. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 21424-21439, Miami, Florida, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  20. Mert Yuksekgonul, Federico Bianchi, Joseph Boen, Sheng Liu, Zhi Huang, Carlos Guestrin, and James Zou. 2024. Textgrad: Automatic "differentiation" via text. Preprint , arXiv:2406.07496. · arXiv
  21. Tianjun Zhang, Fangchen Liu, Justin Wong, Pieter Abbeel, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. 2023. The wisdom of hindsight makes language models better instruction followers. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning , ICML'23. JMLR.org.
  22. Tinghui Zhang, Yifan Wang, and Daisy Zhe Wang. 2025. Scope: A generative approach for llm prompt compression. Preprint , arXiv:2508.15813. · arXiv
  23. Yi Zhao, Zuchao Li, Hai Zhao, Baoyuan Qi, and Liu Guoming. 2025. DAC: A dynamic attention-aware approach for task-agnostic prompt compression. In Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages 19395-19407, Vienna, Austria. Association for Computational Linguistics.

Authors
Zakazov, I., Argin, B., Gabouj, O., Charaf, K., Sharipov, A., Semiz, A., Drudi, L., Baldwin, N., & West, R.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4416354534
Cited by
0
References
4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
prompt compression, Group Relative Policy Optimization, supervised fine-tuning, cost-quality trade-off, LLM benchmarking, GSM8K

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