How the taxonomy is shaped
The model-tier ladder
Moving down the hierarchy adds techniques without removing them — except where a technique is superseded by a more general alternative. Supersession is not binary: a superseded technique often remains technically available.
ML · Machine Learning
8 techniques available
New at this tier (8)
Training, Retraining, Curriculum Learning, Active Learning, Data Augmentation, Semi-SL, FL, Calibration
DL · Deep Learning
28 techniques available
New at this tier (20)
FT (full), FT (partial), PEFT (LoRA, adapters), DA, FSL, CL, TIL, DIL, LP, LEACE, Adversarial Training, Meta-Learning, MTL, Self-Play, SSL / CPT, DP-FT, KD, Model Compression, TTA, Machine Unlearning
FM · Foundation Model
32 techniques available
New at this tier (5)
Task Arith. & Model Merging, Long-Context Ext., MoE, Prompt Learning, Cross-Modal Alignment
LLM · Large Language Model
40 techniques available
New at this tier (14)
ReFT, SFT, RLHF (LLM Alignment), DPO, RLAIF/CAI, RLVR/GRPO, PE, APO, RAG, ICL, CE, Test-Time Compute Scaling, Knowledge Editing, Activation Steering
MLLM · Multimodal Large Language Model
41 techniques available
New at this tier (2)
Modality-Spec. Adapters, Multimodal Instr. Tuning
Computed from D6 membership and curated supersession relations
Do the families hold together?
Not really — and the paper says so. Measuring how well the nine navigational families separate in profile space gives a silhouette of +0.0173 across all rows, or +0.0566 over the post-training techniques alone. Both are near zero; anything below about 0.2 indicates no meaningful clustering.
This is the expected result. The families are navigational groupings to aid discovery, not validated statistical clusters. Techniques share one anchor dimension while differing on others, which is exactly why a single axis cannot hold them.
Computed from the taxonomy data
Similarity projection
Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness Calibration, Personalization, and Multimodal Adaptation Data-Centric and Privacy-Preserving Methods Efficiency and Composition Inference-Time Adaptation Knowledge Modification and Activation-Based Adaptation Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization Reference Baseline Temporal Adaptation and Maintenance Training Strategies
Coordinates as a table
| Technique | Family | x, y |
|---|---|---|
| Training | Reference Baseline | -2.81, 2.89 |
| FT (full) | Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization | -2.93, 2.52 |
| FT (partial) | Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization | -0.59, 3.57 |
| PEFT (LoRA, adapters) | Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization | 0.18, 3.42 |
| ReFT | Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization | 0.21, 4.13 |
| DA | Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization | -0.98, 3.88 |
| FSL | Knowledge Transfer and Task Specialization | -0.82, 4.38 |
| Retraining | Temporal Adaptation and Maintenance | -2.85, 3.44 |
| CL | Temporal Adaptation and Maintenance | -2.04, 3.88 |
| TIL | Temporal Adaptation and Maintenance | -1.96, 4.12 |
| DIL | Temporal Adaptation and Maintenance | -2.31, 4.30 |
| SFT | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | 4.27, 0.90 |
| RLHF (LLM Alignment) | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | 3.85, 1.30 |
| DPO | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | 4.31, 1.55 |
| RLAIF/CAI | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | 3.74, 1.05 |
| RLVR/GRPO | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | 4.50, 1.19 |
| LP | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | 0.54, 3.93 |
| LEACE | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | -0.38, 2.90 |
| Adversarial Training | Alignment, Reasoning, and Trustworthiness | -3.30, 2.78 |
| Meta-Learning | Training Strategies | -1.24, 4.49 |
| MTL | Training Strategies | -3.46, 3.67 |
| Self-Play | Training Strategies | -3.31, 3.38 |
| Curriculum Learning | Training Strategies | 0.55, 7.67 |
| Active Learning | Training Strategies | 0.82, 7.33 |
| Data Augmentation | Data-Centric and Privacy-Preserving Methods | 0.86, 7.35 |
| Semi-SL | Data-Centric and Privacy-Preserving Methods | 0.41, 7.27 |
| SSL / CPT | Data-Centric and Privacy-Preserving Methods | -1.52, 3.48 |
| DP-FT | Data-Centric and Privacy-Preserving Methods | -1.62, 2.77 |
| FL | Data-Centric and Privacy-Preserving Methods | -2.09, 2.82 |
| KD | Efficiency and Composition | 1.21, 3.41 |
| Model Compression | Efficiency and Composition | 1.55, 3.53 |
| Task Arith. & Model Merging | Efficiency and Composition | 1.31, 2.97 |
| Long-Context Ext. | Efficiency and Composition | 0.47, 2.75 |
| MoE | Efficiency and Composition | 0.75, 3.04 |
| PE | Inference-Time Adaptation | 8.34, 0.59 |
| Prompt Learning | Inference-Time Adaptation | -0.27, 3.88 |
| APO | Inference-Time Adaptation | 8.78, 0.77 |
| RAG | Inference-Time Adaptation | 8.13, 0.89 |
| ICL | Inference-Time Adaptation | 8.69, 0.87 |
| CE | Inference-Time Adaptation | 8.44, 1.28 |
| TTA | Inference-Time Adaptation | -1.95, 4.65 |
| Test-Time Compute Scaling | Inference-Time Adaptation | 8.50, 0.25 |
| Calibration | Calibration, Personalization, and Multimodal Adaptation | 0.82, 3.81 |
| Cross-Modal Alignment | Calibration, Personalization, and Multimodal Adaptation | 1.97, 2.20 |
| Modality-Spec. Adapters | Calibration, Personalization, and Multimodal Adaptation | 1.89, 2.49 |
| Multimodal Instr. Tuning | Calibration, Personalization, and Multimodal Adaptation | 2.64, 1.94 |
| Machine Unlearning | Knowledge Modification and Activation-Based Adaptation | -0.73, 2.55 |
| Knowledge Editing | Knowledge Modification and Activation-Based Adaptation | -0.40, 2.73 |
| Activation Steering | Knowledge Modification and Activation-Based Adaptation | 3.84, 1.53 |
Pairwise distances are independent of the projection and are shown on every technique page under nearest profiles.