arXiv — Machine Learning · · 3 min read

Procedural Knowledge Is Not Low-Rank: Why LoRA Fails to Internalize Multi-Step Procedures

Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

arXiv:2607.21612 (cs)
[Submitted on 23 May 2026]

Title:Procedural Knowledge Is Not Low-Rank: Why LoRA Fails to Internalize Multi-Step Procedures

View a PDF of the paper titled Procedural Knowledge Is Not Low-Rank: Why LoRA Fails to Internalize Multi-Step Procedures, by Simon Dennis and 3 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods like LoRA have become the default for adapting large language models, succeeding across instruction following, style transfer, and factual adaptation. We show that for procedural knowledge--the ability to follow multi-step procedures with conditional branching through to terminal states--LoRA fails to match full fine-tuning at the ranks where it retains its efficiency advantage. In a systematic ablation (r = 16--128) on a procedural travel booking task (14 nodes), all LoRA configurations fail uniformly (task success <= 2.54 vs. 4.11 for full fine-tuning, all p < 0.001), with scores decreasing at higher ranks--despite maintaining 95--99% conversation completion rates. Cross-domain replication on Zoom support (14 nodes) and insurance claims (55 nodes) at 8B confirms the failure generalizes: LoRA underperforms full fine-tuning by 0.8--2.2 points on average at both r = 32 and r = 128, with the largest gap on the most complex procedure. Quadrupling rank from 32 to 128 provides marginal improvement but does not close the gap. SVD analysis of the weight changes produced by full fine-tuning explains why: across three domains at both 3B and 8B, the mean effective rank of the update ranges from 761 to 1,026, and rank 128 captures only 43--51% of the squared Frobenius norm. Together, these findings establish that for procedural tasks LoRA falls well short of full fine-tuning--a fundamental limitation for agentic applications.
Comments: 14 pages
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2607.21612 [cs.AI]
  (or arXiv:2607.21612v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.21612
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Simon Dennis [view email]
[v1] Sat, 23 May 2026 17:06:02 UTC (88 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Procedural Knowledge Is Not Low-Rank: Why LoRA Fails to Internalize Multi-Step Procedures, by Simon Dennis and 3 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.AI
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
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?)
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.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — Machine Learning