Beyond Elicitation: Provision-based Prompt Optimization for Knowledge-Intensive Tasks
arXiv:2511.10465v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While prompt optimization has emerged as a critical technique for enhancing language model performance, existing approaches primarily focus on elicitation-based strategies that search for optimal prompts to activate models' capabilities. These methods exhibit fundamental limitations when addressing knowledge-intensive tasks, as they operate within static knowledge capacity rather than providing the factual knowledge, terminology precision, and reasoning patterns required in specialized domains. To address these limitations, we propose K — Yunzhe Xu, Zhuosheng Zhang, Zhe Liu
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:While prompt optimization has emerged as a critical technique for enhancing language model performance, existing approaches primarily focus on elicitation-based strategies that search for optimal prompts to activate models' capabilities. These methods exhibit fundamental limitations when addressing knowledge-intensive tasks, as they operate within static knowledge capacity rather than providing the factual knowledge, terminology precision, and reasoning patterns required in specialized domains. To address these limitations, we propose Knowledge-Provision-based Prompt Optimization (KPPO), a framework that reformulates prompt optimization as systematic knowledge integration rather than potential elicitation. KPPO introduces three key innovations: 1) a knowledge gap filling mechanism for knowledge gap identification and targeted remediation; 2) a batch-wise candidate evaluation approach that considers both performance improvement and distributional stability; 3) an adaptive knowledge pruning strategy that balances performance and token efficiency, reducing up to 29% of inference token usage. Evaluation on 15 knowledge-intensive benchmarks from various domains demonstrates KPPO's superiority over elicitation-based methods, with an average improvement of ~6% over baselines while achieving comparable or lower token consumption.
Comments: Accepted by IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language Processing (TASLP)
Subjects:
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2511.10465 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2511.10465v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.10465
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
Submission history
From: Yunzhe Xu [view email] [v1] Thu, 13 Nov 2025 16:33:18 UTC (693 KB) [v2] Sat, 28 Mar 2026 15:27:08 UTC (1,000 KB)
Sign in to highlight and annotate this article
Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
researchpaperarxiv
How to Build an AI Content Playbook That Actually Protects Your Voice
Ahnii! You've read the articles warning you not to let AI take over your content. Ruth Doherty's latest piece is one of the best: a clear-eyed breakdown of where AI helps and where it silently destroys your brand. This post shows you how to take that framework and turn it into an actual operating document for your content pipeline. Why a Framework Without a Playbook Doesn't Stick Ruth's core argument is sharp: AI is an efficiency engine, not a strategy engine. Use it for research, structuring, repurposing, and editing. Keep it away from messaging, customer research, and anything that requires your actual point of view. That distinction is easy to agree with. It's harder to enforce on a Tuesday afternoon when you're behind on three social posts and the AI can draft all of them in 90 seconds
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!