Observational causal-inspired analysis finds prompt optimization failures arise from systematic interactions between edit families and task characteristics rather than random artifacts.
A Reproducible Optimisation Protocol for Calibrating Prompt-Based Large Language Model Workflows in Evidence Synthesis
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
This methods article presents a reproducible calibration workflow for prompt-based large language models (LLMs) in structured evidence-synthesis tasks. The method separates the rules that define the scientific task from the mutable prompt harness that frames and applies them. It optimises that harness against labelled or reference examples and an explicit task metric, then preserves the calibrated workflow as an inspectable artefact with its specification, metric, settings, and evaluation traces. The example code instantiates the protocol with DSPy and GEPA tools, but the underlying logic can transfer to other prompt-optimisation frameworks that support structured task definitions, metric-guided search, and artefact reuse. Title and abstract screening is the worked validation case because it provides labelled benchmark data and clear evaluation metrics. The demonstrated workflow uses a smaller student LLM for performing the scientific task execution and a larger reflection LLM to steer the prompt optimisation process during calibration. This work shows compilation, artefact round-tripping, and how optimisation budget affects a smaller student model.
fields
cs.CL 1years
2026 1verdicts
UNVERDICTED 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Why Prompt Optimization Works, and Why It Sometimes Doesn't: A Causal-Inspired Edit-Level Analysis
Observational causal-inspired analysis finds prompt optimization failures arise from systematic interactions between edit families and task characteristics rather than random artifacts.