AI Wiki

Prompt engineering for text generation: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Prompt engineering for text generation (view source)

Revision as of 07:32, 16 January 2024

16,343 bytes added ,  16 January
no edit summary
No edit summary
 
(77 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:


Prompt Engineering or ChatGPT should be avoided in certain scenarios. Firstly, when 100% reliability is required. Secondly, when the accuracy of the model's output cannot be evaluated. Finally, when generating content that is not in the model's training data, these techniques may not be the best approach to use. <ref name="”11”"></ref>
Prompt Engineering or ChatGPT should be avoided in certain scenarios. Firstly, when 100% reliability is required. Secondly, when the accuracy of the model's output cannot be evaluated. Finally, when generating content that is not in the model's training data, these techniques may not be the best approach to use. <ref name="”11”"></ref>
==Structure of a Prompt==
The composition of a prompt typically consists of various parts, although not all prompts incorporate every component. However, effective prompts often include two or more of these components for better results. In general, the components of a prompt are arranged in a specific order. The prompt structure starts with instructions/task description, followed by context/external information (if applicable), followed by examples (if applicable), then the user input/query, and finally, the output indicator. This organized structure ensures the prompt is clear and comprehensible, resulting in more accurate and relevant responses from the [[language model]].
===Instructions or Task Description===
Instructions or Task description tells the [[model]] what to do. What do you want, and how to create the output. How to use the context or examples. What to do with the query. Clear instructions enable the model to deliver more accurate and relevant responses.
===Context or External Information===
Context or external information is the additional information for the model that might not exist in the model. They can be manually inserted into the prompt, retrieved via a vector database ([[retrieval augmentation]]), or gathered from other sources such as [[APIs]]. Providing context helps the model generate more informed and precise responses.
*Context or external information is entirely optional.
===Example(s)===
Example(s) are a few instances of user input/query along with corresponding output provided by the user and shown to the language model. It is often utilized in [[few-shot prompting]] and is entirely optional.
===User Input or Query===
The user input or query is typically submitted by a human user. Although not always the case, most prompts involve a query input from the user. This input serves as the basis for the model's response and assists in tailoring the output to the user's specific needs.
===Output Indicator===
The output indicator signifies the beginning of the generated text. For instance, when generating Python code, the word "import" may be used to indicate that the model should start writing Python code, as many Python scripts begin with the "import" statement. The output indicator helps to maintain the desired format and structure of the response.
===Example of a Prompt with the Above Structure===
Example using [[ChatGPT]] with [[GPT-4]]
====Input====
<poem style="border: 1px solid; padding: 1rem">
Instruction: Identify the president of the United States of America for the given year.
'''Context:'''
Considering that GPT-4's knowledge is limited to information up until September 2021. We need to provide some context to help with the task with Joe Biden.
#1861-1865: Abraham Lincoln was the 16th president of the United States.
#1933-1945: Franklin D. Roosevelt was the 32nd president of the United States and served four terms.
#1961-1963: John F. Kennedy was the 35th president of the United States.
#2009-2017: Barack Obama was the 44th president of the United States.
#2021-2025: Joe Biden is the 46th president of the United States.
'''Examples:'''
*1801: Thomas Jefferson
*1901: William McKinley
*1981: Ronald Reagan
*2001: George W. Bush
'''Query and output indicator:'''
*1945:
*2017:
*2023:
</poem>
====Output====
<poem style="border: 1px solid; padding: 1rem">
*1945: Franklin D. Roosevelt
*2017: Barack Obama
*2023: Joe Biden
</poem>


==Building Prompts==
==Building Prompts==
Line 32: Line 87:
The model can also be asked to act as a technical advisor, mentor, quality assurance, code reviewer, debugging assistant, compliance checker, code optimization specialist, accessibility expert, search engine optimization specialist, and performance analyst. Examples of prompts for the use cases are available [https://github.com/mattnigh/ChatGPT3-Free-Prompt-List here].
The model can also be asked to act as a technical advisor, mentor, quality assurance, code reviewer, debugging assistant, compliance checker, code optimization specialist, accessibility expert, search engine optimization specialist, and performance analyst. Examples of prompts for the use cases are available [https://github.com/mattnigh/ChatGPT3-Free-Prompt-List here].


==Few-shot Standard Prompting==
==Zero-shot Prompting==
[[Few-shot Standard Prompts]] have a task description, a few examples and then a prompt.
[[Zero-shot prompting]] involves giving the model a [[task description]]/[[instruction]] and directly asking it for a result. It does not show the model any [[examples]].
 
<poem style="border: 1px solid; padding: 1rem">
'''Input (task description/instruction):''' Who was the president of United States in 1999?
'''Output:'''
</poem>
 
==Few-shot Prompting (Basic)==
[[Few-shot prompting]] have a task description, a few examples and then a prompt.
 
===For example===
 
<poem style="border: 1px solid; padding: 1rem">
What are the 2-letter abbreviations for the following U.S. states?
 
New York is beautiful during autumn: NY
I went to school in California: CA
 
Vacationing in Florida is fun:
</poem>
 
'''The task description''':
*What are the 2-letter abbreviations for the following U.S. states?
 
'''The examples''':
*New York is beautiful during autumn: NY<br>
*I went to school in California: CA


For example:
'''The prompt''':
*Vacationing in Florida is fun:  


<code>
===Example output===
What is the capital city of this country?


United States: Washington D.C.
<poem style="border: 1px solid; padding: 1rem">
Vacationing in Florida is fun: FL
</poem>


France: Paris
==Few-shot Prompting (Advanced)==
In few-shot prompting, the model is presented with high-quality demonstrations, including input and desired output, for the target task. This approach enables the model to understand the human intention better and the desired criteria for answers, often resulting in improved performance compared to zero-shot prompting. However, this comes at the expense of increased token consumption and may reach the context length limit for longer input and output texts.


Ecuador:
Numerous studies have explored how to construct in-context examples to maximize performance. [[Prompt format]], [[training examples]], and [[example order]] can lead to dramatically different performance outcomes, ranging from near-random guessing to near state-of-the-art (SoTA) results.
</code>


==Prompt Engineering for Code Generation Models==
Zhao et al. (2021) investigated [[few-shot classification]] using LLMs, specifically [[GPT-3]]. They identified several biases that contribute to high [[variance]] in performance: (1) majority [[label bias]], (2) [[recency bias]], and (3) [[common token bias]]. To address these [[biases]], they proposed a method to calibrate label probabilities output by the model to be uniform when the input string is N/A.<ref name="”111”">Zhao et al. (2021) Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.09690</ref>
[[File:Coding_model_diagram1.png|alt=Figure 2. Prompt to completion.|thumb|400x400px|Figure 2. From prompt to completion.]]
 
Genearte [[code]] using [[models]] like the [[OpenAI Codex]].
===Tips for Example Selection===
====Semantically Similar Examples====
Liu et al. (2021) suggested choosing examples that are semantically similar to the test example by employing [[k-nearest neighbors]] (KNN) clustering in the [[embedding space]].<ref name="”112”">Liu et al. (2021) What Makes Good In-Context Examples for GPT-3? https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.06804</ref>
 
====Diverse and Representative Examples====
Su et al. (2022) proposed a [[graph-based approach]] to select a diverse and representative set of examples: (1) construct a directed graph based on the cosine similarity between samples in the embedding space (e.g., using [[SBERT]] or other [[embedding models]]), and (2) start with a set of selected samples and a set of remaining samples, scoring each sample to encourage [[diverse selection]].<ref name="”113”">Su et al. (2022) Selective Annotation Makes Language Models Better Few-Shot Learners https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.01975</ref>
 
====Embeddings via Contrastive Learning====
Rubin et al. (2022) suggested training embeddings through [[contrastive learning]] specific to one [[training dataset]] for [[in-context learning]] sample selection. This approach measures the quality of an example based on a conditioned probability assigned by the language model.<ref name="”114”">Rubin et al. (2022) Learning To Retrieve Prompts for In-Context Learning https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.08633</ref>


#Describe the task - tell the [[coding model]] what you want it to do at a high level.
====Q-Learning====
#Describe the context - describe background information like API hints and database schema to help the model understand the task.
Zhang et al. (2022) explored using [[Q-Learning]] for sample selection in LLM training.<ref name="”115”">Zhang et al. (2022) Active Example Selection for In-Context Learning https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.04486</ref>
#Show examples - show the model examples of what you want.


===Task===
====Uncertainty-Based Active Learning====
Give the coding model a high-level task description. To improve the quality of the generated code, it's recommended to start the prompt with a broad description of the task at hand. For example, if you want to generate Python code to plot data from a standard [[dataset]], you can provide a prompt like this:  
Diao et al. (2023) proposed identifying examples with [[high disagreement]] or [[entropy]] among multiple sampling trials based on [[uncertainty-based active learning]]. These examples can then be annotated and used in few-shot prompts.<ref name="”116”">Diao et al. (2023) Active Prompting with Chain-of-Thought for Large Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.12246</ref>


<code># Load iris data from scikit-learn datasets and plot the training data.</code>
===Tips for Example Ordering===
A general recommendation is to maintain a diverse selection of examples relevant to the test sample and present them in random order to avoid [[majority label bias]] and [[recency bias]]. Increasing [[model size]]s or including more [[training examples]] does not necessarily reduce [[variance]] among different permutations of in-context examples. The exact order may work well for one model but poorly for another.


However, sometimes the generated code may not be optimal, in which case you can provide more specific instructions such as importing libraries before using them. By combining a high-level task description with detailed user instructions, you can create a more effective prompt for coding model to generate code.
When the [[validation set]] is limited, Lu et al. (2022) suggested choosing the order such that the model does not produce extremely unbalanced predictions or exhibit overconfidence in its predictions.<ref name="”117”">Lu et al. (2022) Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivity https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.08786</ref>


===Examples===
==Roles==
Gives the coding model examples. Imagine you prefer a unique style of writing Python code that differs from what model produces. Take, for instance, when adding two numbers, you prefer to label the arguments differently. The key to working with models like Codex is to clearly communicate what you want it to do. One effective way to do this is to provide examples for Codex to learn from and strive to match its output to your preferred style. If you give the model a longer prompt that includes the example mentioned, it will then name the arguments in the same manner as in the example.
Give [[ChatGPT]] a role it can emulate and roleplay as by starting with the text '''"Act as a..."'''.


See also [[zero shot, one shot and few shot learning]]
For example, if you have a history exam about Rome, you can ask the AI to


===Context===
''Act as a historian and tell me about Julius Caesar''
If you want to use a library that the coding model is not familiar with, you can guide it by describing the API library beforehand.


For instance, the Minecraft Codex sample uses the Simulated Player API in TypeScript to control a character in the game. Since this is a newer API that the model does not know about yet, When given the prompt, the model attempts to make an educated guess based on the terms "bot" and "Simulated Player". However, the resulting code is not correct.
For additional roles, check out this website: https://prompts.chat/


To correct this, you can show the model model the API definition, including function signatures and examples, so that it can generate code that follows the API correctly. As demonstrated in the example, by providing high-level context in the form of the API definition and examples, the model can understand what you want it to do and generate more accurate code.
==Give Your Prompt a Personality==
Give your prompt personality by giving it a style and adding descriptors. Styles include [[tones]], [[formality]], and the domain of the writer. Descriptors are adjectives that you add to tweak your prompt.


==How to Create Descriptive, Poetic Text==
By giving your prompt personalities, the generated content would be harder for [[AI content detectors]] to detect.
===Tips===
*Choose a topic and narrow down the scope.
*Select a point-of-view like third, second or first person.
*Directly or indirectly convey a mood. A subject or scene could evoke a particular feeling or you could give the [[chatbot]] a mood directly.
*Describe sensory details. Add details about the scene such as sounds, sights, smells, or textures. By pointing out an important detail, you can guide the output.
*Don't tell, Show. Ask the chatbot not to tell the user how to think or feel.
*Use figurative language. The chatbot should be encouraged to use metaphors, similes and descriptive phrases. Request a description that is evocative, lyrical, beautiful or poetic.
*Iterate and iterate. Your first prompt might not yield the desired result. Rework the prompt until you find an appealing answer. After you have created a prompt that is appealing, the chatbot can create many descriptions and you can pick the one you like.
*Edit and revise. Don't be afraid of revising and editing the generated text.
*You can ask the chatbot for assistance. The chatbot will explain why it selected a specific detail or phrase in a reply. The chatbot can also help you create a better prompt. You can point out individual phrases and ask the chatbot for alternatives or suggestions.
===Template===
<blockquote>
Describe ''YOUR SCENE''. Use sensory language and detail to describe the ''OBJECTS IN THE SCENE vividly''. Describe ''SPECIFIC DETAILS'' and any other sensory details that come to mind. Vary the sentence structure and use figurative language as appropriate. Avoid telling the reader how to feel or think about the scene.
</blockquote>


==Overview of Tones==
==Overview of Tones==
Line 124: Line 201:
*'''[[Straightforward]]''' and '''[[Professional]]''' - business emails, formal communication, legal documents
*'''[[Straightforward]]''' and '''[[Professional]]''' - business emails, formal communication, legal documents
*'''[[Trustworthy]]''' and '''[[Professional]]''' - business proposals, executive summaries, investor pitches
*'''[[Trustworthy]]''' and '''[[Professional]]''' - business proposals, executive summaries, investor pitches
==Self-Consistency Sampling==
[[Self-consistency sampling]] is a method for generating multiple outputs using a [[temperature]] greater than 0 and selecting the best candidate from the generated outputs. The criteria for choosing the best candidate may vary according to the task. A common approach is to use [[majority vote]]. In tasks that are easy to validate, such as programming questions with unit tests, the outputs can be run through an interpreter and their correctness can be verified using unit tests.<ref name="”118”">Wang et al. (2022a) Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.11171</ref>
==Chain of Thought Prompting==
[[Chain of Thought Prompting]] (CoT prompting) is a technique introduced by Wei et al. (2022) to generate a sequence of short sentences describing step-by-step reasoning, known as [[reasoning chains]] or [[rationales]], leading to the final answer. [[CoT prompting]] is particularly useful for complex reasoning tasks when applied to large language models (e.g., those with over 50 billion parameters), while simpler tasks may benefit only marginally.<ref name="”119”">Wei et al. (2022) Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903</ref>
===Types of CoT Prompts===
There are two main types of CoT prompting:
====Few-shot CoT====
[[Few-shot CoT prompting]] involves providing the model with a limited number of demonstrations, each containing either manually written or model-generated high-quality reasoning chains. Examples of such demonstrations are provided in the original article, showcasing how this type of prompting is used to solve various mathematical reasoning problems.
====Zero-shot CoT====
[[Zero-shot CoT prompting]] uses natural language statements, such as "Let's think step by step" or "Let's work this out step by step to be sure we have the right answer," to explicitly encourage the model to generate reasoning chains. Following this, a statement like "Therefore, the answer is" is used to prompt the model to produce the final answer.<ref name="”128”">Kojima et al. (2022) Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.11916</ref><ref name="”129”">Zhou et al. (2022) Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.01910</ref>
===Tips and Extensions===
Several techniques have been proposed to improve the accuracy and effectiveness of CoT prompting:
*[[Self-consistency sampling]], as suggested by Wang et al. (2022a), can improve reasoning accuracy by sampling a number of diverse answers and taking the majority vote.<ref name="”118”"></ref>
*Wang et al. (2022b) proposed using ensemble learning by altering the example order or replacing human-written rationales with model-generated ones, introducing randomness during multiple sample trials. Model outputs can then be aggregated using a majority vote to obtain the final answer.<ref name="”120”">Wang et al. (2022b) Rationale-Augmented Ensembles in Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.00747</ref>
*If training examples only have true answers but no rationales, the [[STaR]] ([[Self-Taught Reasoner]]) method by Zelikman et al. (2022) can be followed: (1) ask the model to generate reasoning chains and keep only those leading to correct answers; (2) fine-tune the model with generated rationales and repeat the process until convergence. Higher temperature settings are more likely to generate incorrect rationales with correct answers.<ref name="”121”">Zelikman et al. (2022) STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoning https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.14465</ref>
*Fu et al. (2023) found that prompts with demonstrations of higher reasoning complexity lead to better performance. They also suggested that using newline (\n) symbols to separate reasoning steps works better than step indicators, periods, or semicolons.<ref name="”122”">Fu et al. (2023) Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoning https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.00720</ref>
*Complexity-based consistency, as proposed by Fu et al. (2023), involves explicitly preferring complex chains among all generations by taking a majority vote among only the top complex chains.<ref name="”122”"></ref>
*Shum et al. (2023) discovered that CoT prompts with only complex examples improve the accuracy of complex questions but perform poorly on simple questions. This finding was based on evidence from the [[GSM8k]] dataset.<ref name="”123”">Shum et al. (2023) Automatic Prompt Augmentation and Selection with Chain-of-Thought from Labeled Data https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.12822</ref>
*Fu et al. (2023) found that changing "Q:" to "Question:" in the prompts is helpful.<ref name="”122”"></ref>
*Ye & Durrett (2022) observed that including explanations in prompts has a small to moderate effect on [[NLP]] tasks that involve reasoning over text, such as [[question-answering]] (QA) and [[natural language inference]] (NLI). They also noted that nonfactual explanations are more likely to lead to incorrect predictions than inconsistent explanations.<ref name="”124”">Ye & Durrett (2022) The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoning https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.03401</ref>
*[[Self-Ask]], a method proposed by Press et al. (2022), repeatedly prompts the model to ask follow-up questions, constructing the thought process iteratively.<ref name="”125”">Press et al. (2022) Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03350</ref> Search engine results can be used to answer these follow-up questions. Similarly, [[IRCoT]] ([[Interleaving Retrieval CoT]]; Trivedi et al. 2022) and [[ReAct]] ([[Reason + Act]]; Yao et al. 2023) combine iterative CoT prompting with queries to Wikipedia APIs. These methods search for relevant entities and content and then incorporate the retrieved information back into the context, further enhancing the model's reasoning capabilities.<ref name="”126”">Trivedi et al. (2022) Interleaving Retrieval with Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Knowledge-Intensive Multi-Step Questions https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.10509</ref><ref name="”127”">Yao et al. (2023) ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03629</ref>
==26 Principals for Good Prompts==
{{see also|26 Principles of Good Prompts}}
{{:26 Principles of Good Prompts}}
==Prompt Engineering for Code Generation Models==
[[File:Coding_model_diagram1.png|alt=Figure 2. Prompt to completion.|thumb|400x400px|Figure 2. From prompt to completion.]]
Genearte [[code]] using [[models]] like the [[OpenAI Codex]].
#Describe the task - tell the [[coding model]] what you want it to do at a high level.
#Describe the context - describe background information like API hints and database schema to help the model understand the task.
#Show examples - show the model examples of what you want.
===Task===
Give the coding model a high-level task description. To improve the quality of the generated code, it's recommended to start the prompt with a broad description of the task at hand. For example, if you want to generate Python code to plot data from a standard [[dataset]], you can provide a prompt like this:
<code># Load iris data from scikit-learn datasets and plot the training data.</code>
However, sometimes the generated code may not be optimal, in which case you can provide more specific instructions such as importing libraries before using them. By combining a high-level task description with detailed user instructions, you can create a more effective prompt for coding model to generate code.
===Examples===
Gives the coding model examples. Imagine you prefer a unique style of writing Python code that differs from what model produces. Take, for instance, when adding two numbers, you prefer to label the arguments differently. The key to working with models like Codex is to clearly communicate what you want it to do. One effective way to do this is to provide examples for Codex to learn from and strive to match its output to your preferred style. If you give the model a longer prompt that includes the example mentioned, it will then name the arguments in the same manner as in the example.
See also [[zero shot, one shot and few shot learning]]
===Context===
If you want to use a library that the coding model is not familiar with, you can guide it by describing the API library beforehand.
For instance, the Minecraft Codex sample uses the Simulated Player API in TypeScript to control a character in the game. Since this is a newer API that the model does not know about yet, When given the prompt, the model attempts to make an educated guess based on the terms "bot" and "Simulated Player". However, the resulting code is not correct.
To correct this, you can show the model model the API definition, including function signatures and examples, so that it can generate code that follows the API correctly. As demonstrated in the example, by providing high-level context in the form of the API definition and examples, the model can understand what you want it to do and generate more accurate code.
==How to Create Descriptive, Poetic Text==
===Tips===
*Choose a topic and narrow down the scope.
*Select a point-of-view like third, second or first person.
*Directly or indirectly convey a mood. A subject or scene could evoke a particular feeling or you could give the [[chatbot]] a mood directly.
*Describe sensory details. Add details about the scene such as sounds, sights, smells, or textures. By pointing out an important detail, you can guide the output.
*Don't tell, Show. Ask the chatbot not to tell the user how to think or feel.
*Use figurative language. The chatbot should be encouraged to use metaphors, similes and descriptive phrases. Request a description that is evocative, lyrical, beautiful or poetic.
*Iterate and iterate. Your first prompt might not yield the desired result. Rework the prompt until you find an appealing answer. After you have created a prompt that is appealing, the chatbot can create many descriptions and you can pick the one you like.
*Edit and revise. Don't be afraid of revising and editing the generated text.
*You can ask the chatbot for assistance. The chatbot will explain why it selected a specific detail or phrase in a reply. The chatbot can also help you create a better prompt. You can point out individual phrases and ask the chatbot for alternatives or suggestions.
===Template===
<blockquote>
Describe ''YOUR SCENE''. Use sensory language and detail to describe the ''OBJECTS IN THE SCENE vividly''. Describe ''SPECIFIC DETAILS'' and any other sensory details that come to mind. Vary the sentence structure and use figurative language as appropriate. Avoid telling the reader how to feel or think about the scene.
</blockquote>


==Parameters==
==Parameters==
Line 158: Line 318:
*[[Vividness]] -
*[[Vividness]] -
*[[Ecclesiastical]] -
*[[Ecclesiastical]] -
==Connecting External APIs==
==Resources==
*'''[https://github.com/openai/openai-cookbook OpenAI Cookbook]''' - detailed examples on how to utilize LLM efficiently.
*'''[[LangChain]]''' - library for combining language models with other components to build applications.
*'''[https://github.com/dair-ai/Prompt-Engineering-Guide Prompt Engineering Guide]''' - repo contains a fairly comprehensive collection of educational materials on the topic
*'''[https://learnprompting.org/docs/intro learnprompting.org]'''
*'''[https://promptperfect.jina.ai/ PromptPerfect]'''
*'''[https://github.com/microsoft/semantic-kernel Semantic Kernel]'''


==References==
==References==
Beetlejuice
1,065

edits

Retrieved from "http:///wiki/Special:MobileDiff/3100...11895"