Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures

Summary

arXiv:2609.15990v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Few-shot prompting sometimes degrades language models instead of helping them, but why this happens is unknown. We evaluate 12 open-weight models on two Ukrainian tasks news classification and legal case outcome prediction and find that the effect is strongly task-dependent: the same models that gain +24 pp on news show only +3.4 pp on legal text, with two models degrading. To understand why, we look inside the models. Prior work measures how much hidden states shift between zero-shot and few-shot modes, but few-shot prompts are much longer, and that length difference alone moves representations. We propose a simple fix: replace demonstrations with length-matched random text to measure the shift caused by prompt length, then subtract it. The…

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Volodymyr Ovcharov
Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 23 May 2026]

Title:Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures

View a PDF of the paper titled Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures, by Volodymyr Ovcharov

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Few-shot prompting sometimes degrades language models instead of helping them, but why this happens is unknown. We evaluate 12 open-weight models on two Ukrainian tasks news classification and legal case outcome prediction and find that the effect is strongly task-dependent: the same models that gain +24 pp on news show only +3.4 pp on legal text, with two models degrading. To understand why, we look inside the models. Prior work measures how much hidden states shift between zero-shot and few-shot modes, but few-shot prompts are much longer, and that length difference alone moves representations. We propose a simple fix: replace demonstrations with length-matched random text to measure the shift caused by prompt length, then subtract it. The resulting metric content delta isolates how much the model's representations change because of what the demonstrations say, not how long they are. This changes the picture entirely: raw shift does not predict whether few-shot helps or hurts (r = 0.20), but content delta does (rho = +0.65, p = 0.043). Models that restructure representations more from demonstration content benefit more the opposite of the intuitive "distortion" explanation. Masking demonstrations in Llama 3.3 70B confirms the finding causally, recovering accuracy above the zero-shot baseline.

Comments: 12 pages, 6 figures, 4 tables. Data: this https URL

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

ACM classes: I.2.7

Cite as: arXiv:2609.15990 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.15990v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.15990

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Volodymyr Ovcharov [view email] [v1] Sat, 23 May 2026 20:49:51 UTC (138 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures, by Volodymyr Ovcharov

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs cs.LG

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.15990v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Few-shot prompting sometimes degrades language models instead of helping them, but why this happens is unknown. We evaluate 12 open…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.