Despite the fact that large-scale Language Models (LLM) have achieved SOTA performances on a variety of NLP tasks, its performance on NER is still significantly below supervised baselines. This is due to the gap between the two tasks the NER and LLMs: the former is a sequence labeling task in nature while the latter is a text-generation model.In this paper, we propose GPT-NER to resolve this issue. GPT-NER bridges the gap by transforming the sequence labeling task to a generation task that can be easily adapted by LLMs e.g., the task of finding location entities in the input text “Columbus is a city” is transformed to generate the text sequence "@@Columbus## is a city”, where special tokens @@## marks the entity to extract. To efficiently address the hallucination issue of LLMs, where LLMs have a strong inclination to over-confidently label NULL inputs as entities, we propose a self-verification strategy by prompting LLMs to ask itself whether the extracted entities belong to a labeled entity tag.We conduct experiments on five widely adopted NER datasets, and GPT-NER achieves comparable performances to fully supervised baselines, which is the first time as far as we are concerned. More importantly, we find that GPT-NER exhibits a greater ability in the low-resource and few-shot setups, when the amount of training data is extremely scarce, GPT-NER performs significantly better than supervised models. This demonstrates the capabilities of GPT-NER in real-world NER applications where the number of labeled examples is limited.

Packing, initially utilized in the pre-training phase, is an optimization technique designed to maximize hardware resource efficiency by combining different training sequences to fit the model’s maximum input length. Although it has demonstrated effectiveness during pre-training, there remains a lack of comprehensive analysis for the supervised fine-tuning (SFT) stage on the following points: (1) whether packing can effectively enhance training efficiency while maintaining performance, (2) the suitable size of the model and dataset for fine-tuning with the packing method, and (3) whether packing unrelated or related training samples might cause the model to either excessively disregard or over-rely on the context.In this paper, we perform extensive comparisons between SFT methods using padding and packing, covering SFT datasets ranging from 69K to 1.2M and models from 8B to 70B. This provides the first comprehensive analysis of the advantages and limitations of packing versus padding, as well as practical considerations for implementing packing in various training scenarios. Our analysis covers various benchmarks, including knowledge, reasoning, and coding, as well as GPT-based evaluations, time efficiency, and other fine-tuning parameters. We also open-source our code for fine-tuning and evaluation and provide checkpoints fine-tuned on datasets of different sizes, aiming to advance future research on packing methods.