Index  |  Benchmarks  |  Mathematics  |  Graph  |  About
SRCH:8C2A6500

Learning From Failure: Integrating Negative Examples when Fine-tuning Large Lang

Submitted: 27 May 2026
Review score: 8.00/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Quality tier: DOI grade
Verified claims: 6
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20412097

Abstract

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved success in acting as agents, which interact with environments through tools such as search engines. However, LLMs are optimized for language generation instead of tool use during training or alignment, limiting their effectiveness as agents. To resolve this problem, previous work has first collected interaction trajectories between LLMs and environments, using only trajectories that successfully finished the task to fine-tune smaller models, making fine-tuning data scarce and acquiring it both difficult and costly. Discarding failed trajectories also

Research Question

How does the inference throughput (tokens/sec) of Llama-3-70B vary when scaling context window from 4K to 128K versus adding a 3-step retrieval pipeline on HotPotQA multi-hop questions, measured in terms of end-to-end accuracy and latency?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims6
Claim record sourcenot publicly specified

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Quality Tier

TierDOI grade
BasisReview score and verified-claim count meet DOI-grade public quality thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status HIGH

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL4, External archival record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordRegistered
Claim lineage6 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.