Comparative study reveals performance and memory trade-offs of model adaptation methods in Arabic sentiment classification, indicating full fine-tuning remains superior under low-data regimes.
Pre-trained language models are typically adapted to downstream tasks via full fine tuning. However, this entails substantial computational and memory overhead. Parameter-efficient alternatives such as Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), Quantized Low-Rank Adaptation (QLoRA), and frozen backbone mitigate these costs, but empirical evidence on how their performance–cost trade-offs change under low labeled data in Arabic remains limited. This paper compares four adaptation strategies: full fine tuning, frozen backbone, LoRA, and QLoRA for Arabic binary sentiment classification on the Hotel Arabic Reviews Dataset, using CAMeLBERT-Mix as the pre-trained encoder. The methods are evaluated under a unified experimental setting at three labeled-data levels: the full training set, 100 samples per class, and 25 samples per class. The evaluation metrics are reported as means and standard deviations across five random seeds. At the full-data level, full fine tuning, LoRA, and QLoRA achieve macro-F1 scores between 0.9569 and 0.9579 and are comparable within seed variability, while the frozen backbone exhibits performance that is approximately ten points lower. LoRA and QLoRA use approximately 35.0% less peak GPU memory than full fine tuning but require longer training times. Under reduced-data conditions, full fine tuning outperforms all other adaptation strategies with the differences being statically significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aldaajani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: