UpgradeBench: A Decision-Centric Benchmark for Upgrading Fine-Tuned LLM Specialists

TL;DR

UpgradeBench offers a decision-centric benchmark for upgrading LLM specialists, with a mean quality regret of 0.37pp.

cs.AI πŸ”΄ Advanced 2026-08-21 3 views
Ye Chen Weining Zhang
benchmarking transfer learning language models adapters model upgrade

Key Findings

Methodology

UpgradeBench is a longitudinal benchmark covering four Qwen releases, one continuation checkpoint, six tasks, and two model sizes. It addresses three core questions: does a new checkpoint improve fixed-recipe retrained specialist performance, are specialization assets transferable, and what recovery resources are usable. Simulating 33 upgrade episodes yields a mean quality regret of 0.37pp with one-third the compute and label cost of full retraining.

Key Results

  • In 33 upgrade episodes, the mean quality regret is 0.37pp with zero behavioral regressions, at one-third the compute and label cost of full retraining.
  • Direct adapter copying on OLMo shows retention dropping from 0.88-0.99 at 46B-token continued pretraining to zero at 2.9T tokens.
  • A lightweight CKA probe over 256 prompts predicts cross-version adapter portability with a Spearman correlation of 0.74.

Significance

UpgradeBench provides a systematic evaluation tool for language model upgrade decisions, addressing the evaluation of migration decisions in real model release sequences. It offers academia and industry a standard for assessing the effectiveness of model upgrade strategies, particularly in adapter transfer and resource utilization.

Technical Contribution

This study provides a benchmark of fine-tuning transfer along a complete open-weight release lineage, with first measurements of retention, recovery cost, and specialization half-life. It also maps the freeze/port/refresh/retrain decision space, showing adapter copying fails between independent pretraining runs.

Novelty

UpgradeBench is the first to provide a complete, real release sequence benchmark, evaluating the freeze/port/refresh/retrain decision space. It reveals that adapter copying failure is related to the continuity of pretraining weights, not network architecture.

Limitations

  • Adapter copying fails between independent pretraining runs, indicating a need for continuous weights.
  • Upgrade gains remain within training noise for some tasks.

Future Work

Future research could explore more transfer strategies and adapter designs, especially regarding transferability across different model architectures and tasks.

AI Executive Summary

In the rapidly evolving landscape of modern language models, organizations face the challenge of effectively upgrading their task-specific adapters. Existing transfer learning studies often evaluate isolated model pairs without studying these choices across real model release sequences. UpgradeBench is a decision-driven longitudinal benchmark covering four consecutive Qwen releases, one continuation checkpoint, six tasks, and two model sizes, augmented by OLMo checkpoints with known training lineage.

The study reveals that the success of adapter copying is related to the continuity of pretraining weights rather than network architecture. On OLMo, retention drops from 0.88-0.99 at 46B-token continued pretraining to zero at 2.9T tokens. A lightweight CKA probe over 256 prompts predicts cross-version adapter portability with a Spearman correlation of 0.74.

Simulating 33 upgrade episodes yields a mean quality regret of 0.37pp with zero behavioral regressions, at one-third the compute and label cost of full retraining. UpgradeBench provides a systematic evaluation tool for language model upgrade decisions, addressing the evaluation of migration decisions in real model release sequences.

Deep Dive

Abstract

Organizations maintain task-specific adapters for open-weight language models, and each new base-model release forces a migration decision: retain existing specialists, port adapters, refresh from preserved behavior, or retrain. Prior transfer work evaluates isolated model pairs, without studying these choices across real model release sequences. We present UpgradeBench, a decision-driven longitudinal benchmark covering four consecutive Qwen releases, one continuation checkpoint, six tasks, and two model sizes, augmented by OLMo checkpoints with known training lineage. The benchmark disentangles three core questions: whether a new checkpoint improves fixed-recipe retrained specialist performance, whether specialization assets transfer across versions, and what recovery resources are usable. We observe upgrade gains differ across task-scale-release episodes: some retrained baselines improve while others stay within training noise, with durability ranging from under one release interval for text-to-SQL to over fourteen months for intent classification. Direct adapter copying depends neither on architecture nor model family: on OLMo, retention drops from 0.88-0.99 at 46B-token continued pretraining to zero at 2.9T tokens; annealing and model souping introduce no extra harm, with portability decaying with continued-pretraining distance. Given preserved input data, teacher relabeling recovers target-base specialists without fresh gold annotations, though compute savings are not guaranteed. Simulating a fixed decision policy over 33 upgrade episodes yields 0.37pp mean quality regret with zero behavioral regressions at one-third the compute and label cost of full retraining. A lightweight CKA probe over 256 prompts predicts cross-version adapter portability (Spearman 0.74 across eight model pairs). We release per-example predictions, cost logs, split manifests, and evaluation code.

cs.AI