The Instruction Tax on Factual Recall: Base Models Can Beat Their Instruction-Tuned Counterparts
TL;DR
It is shown that the prompting methodology is as important as the model architecture: while the instruction-tuned model version achieves 0.5681 with its chat interface, the base model achieves 0.6836 when prompted using text completion, which decreases factual recall.
Abstract
We present our solution to the AKBC LM-KBC 2026 Shared Task, where we achieved a score of 0.6836 on the official leaderboard, more than double the baseline of 0.2964. This task requires generating all possible objects for subject-relation pairs using a language model with up to 32 billion parameters, with no retrieval or fine-tuning involved. We show that the prompting methodology is as important as the model architecture: while the instruction-tuned model version achieves 0.5681 with its chat interface, the base model achieves 0.6836 when prompted using text completion. Thus, instruction tuning decreases factual recall; we refer to this effect as the instruction tax, which is caused by the model's weights rather than the prompting method. Our final solution is fairly straightforward: we prompt the base model with some examples from the training data, generate 64--256 outputs, and retain only the repeated ones. Two specialized methods are then applied for each relation: one improves the recall of large answer sets, and the other verifies a person's vitality before predicting their place of death.
