The emergence of long-context large language models (LLMs) has enabled the use of hundreds, or even thousands, of demonstrations for in-context learning (ICL) - a previously impractical regime. This paper investigates whether traditional ICL selection strategies, which balance the similarity of ICL examples to the test input (using a text retriever) with diversity within the ICL set, remain effective when utilizing a large number of demonstrations. Our experiments demonstrate that, while longer contexts can accommodate more examples, simply increasing the number of demonstrations does not guarantee improved performance. Smart ICL selection remains crucial, even with thousands of demonstrations. To further enhance ICL in this setting, we introduce Refract ICL, a novel ICL selection algorithm specifically designed to focus LLM attention on challenging examples by strategically repeating them within the context and incorporating zero-shot predictions as error signals. Our results show that Refract ICL significantly improves the performance of extremely long-context models such as Gemini 1.5 Pro, particularly on tasks with a smaller number of output classes.

In-context learning (ICL) i.e. showing LLMs only a few task-specific demonstrations has led to downstream gains with no task-specific fine-tuning required. However, LLMs are sensitive to the choice of prompts, and therefore a crucial research question is how to select good demonstrations for ICL. One effective strategy is leveraging semantic similarity between the ICL demonstrations and test inputs by using a text retriever, which however is sub-optimal as that does not consider the LLM's existing knowledge about that task. From prior work (Lyu et al., 2023), we already know that labels paired with the demonstrations bias the model predictions. This leads us to our hypothesis whether considering LLM's existing knowledge about the task, especially with respect to the output label space can help in a better demonstration selection strategy. Through extensive experimentation on three text classification tasks, we find that it is beneficial to not only choose semantically similar ICL demonstrations but also to choose those demonstrations that help resolve the inherent label ambiguity surrounding the test example. Interestingly, we find that including demonstrations that the LLM previously mis-classified and also fall on the test example's decision boundary, brings the most performance gain.