DSPy GEPA Optimizer (3.2.x)

GEPA (Genetic-Pareto) is a reflective optimizer: it mutates a program's instructions and few-shots using an LM that reads your metric's textual feedback and proposes improvements. It maintains a Pareto frontier across validation tasks and is the default recommendation for complex DSPy workloads in 2026.

The expansion "Genetic-Evolutionary Prompt Adaptation" that appears in some AI-generated summaries is an LLM-hallucinated backronym. The paper defines GEPA as Genetic-Pareto; the "Pareto" is load-bearing (GEPA keeps a frontier of candidates rather than collapsing to one).

Prerequisites — do these first or GEPA wastes rollouts

1. A dspy.Module that runs end-to-end (see dspy-fundamentals).
2. A rich-feedback metric returning dspy.Prediction(score=float, feedback=str) (see dspy-evaluation-harness). Informative feedback can support reflection; evaluate optimizer benefit on the task rather than assuming superiority. A dict with the same fields still crashes dspy.Evaluate under DSPy 3.2.1 — use dspy.Prediction.
3. trainset and a separate valset. For GEPA, maximize training examples and keep validation just large enough to represent the downstream distribution; do not reuse the same examples for both.
4. A reflection_lm — a strong LM (often the same or stronger than the task LM) set to temperature=1.0 for creative proposals. Current DSPy docs use a GPT-5-class reflection model with a large output budget.

Canonical call

import dspy

dspy.configure(lm=dspy.LM("openai/gpt-5-mini"))
reflection_lm = dspy.LM("openai/gpt-5", temperature=1.0, max_tokens=32000)

optimizer = dspy.GEPA(
    metric=rich_metric,
    auto="medium",                       # "light" / "medium" / "heavy"
    reflection_lm=reflection_lm,
    reflection_minibatch_size=3,
    candidate_selection_strategy="pareto",  # or "current_best"
    skip_perfect_score=True,
    use_merge=True,
    num_threads=8,
    track_stats=True,
    track_best_outputs=True,             # enables inference-time best-of selection
    log_dir="./gepa_logs",               # resume/checkpoint
    seed=0,
)

optimized = optimizer.compile(
    student=program,
    trainset=trainset,
    valset=valset,
)

# Pareto inspection
pareto = optimized.detailed_results.val_aggregate_scores
print("Pareto frontier:", sorted(pareto, reverse=True)[:5])

optimized.save("optimized_program.json", save_program=False)

Import paths

Either works; use the top-level in new code:

import dspy
dspy.GEPA(...)                              # preferred
# equivalently:
from dspy.teleprompt import GEPA

Metric contract (precise)

import dspy

def rich_metric(gold, pred, trace=None, pred_name=None, pred_trace=None):
    score = ...      # 0.0..1.0
    feedback = ...   # detailed natural-language critique
    return dspy.Prediction(score=score, feedback=feedback)

Return dspy.Prediction, not a dict. Some upstream GEPA prose describes score/feedback as a dict-like shape, but dspy.Evaluate in DSPy 3.2.1 still crashes on a literal dict metric (TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'int' and 'dict'). GEPA uses dspy.Evaluate internally for candidate scoring, so a dict return can fail inside GEPA too, not just in your explicit Evaluate(...) calls.

• pred_name / pred_trace are set during reflection on a specific predictor inside your module — write per-predictor feedback when possible (credit assignment). If you cannot localize feedback, return program-level feedback rather than a vague score-only critique.
• Feedback quality is the load-bearing part: specifics about why it failed and what good looks like are what the reflection LM acts on.

Budget knobs

Use either auto=... or explicit budget — not both.

Mode	Rough rollouts	When to use
auto="light"	~20–40 full evals	Sanity-check GEPA works on your metric
auto="medium"	~80–150 full evals	Everyday optimization
auto="heavy"	~300–600 full evals	Final run before ship
max_full_evals=N	Explicit	Deterministic budget
max_metric_calls=N	Explicit	Hard cap on metric invocations (more predictable cost)

Each "full eval" ≈ len(valset) metric calls. Budget accordingly for cost.

Constructor parameters (every one, DSPy 3.2.x)

dspy.GEPA(
    metric,                                  # required
    auto=None,                               # Literal["light","medium","heavy"] | None
    max_full_evals=None,
    max_metric_calls=None,
    reflection_minibatch_size=3,
    candidate_selection_strategy="pareto",   # or "current_best"
    reflection_lm=None,                      # required in practice
    skip_perfect_score=True,
    add_format_failure_as_feedback=False,
    instruction_proposer=None,               # custom ProposalFn
    component_selector="round_robin",        # or a callable
    use_merge=True,
    max_merge_invocations=5,
    num_threads=None,
    failure_score=0.0,
    perfect_score=1.0,
    log_dir=None,
    track_stats=False,
    use_wandb=False,
    wandb_api_key=None,                      # overrides WANDB_API_KEY env var
    wandb_init_kwargs=None,                  # dict forwarded to wandb.init(...)
    track_best_outputs=False,
    warn_on_score_mismatch=True,
    use_mlflow=False,
    seed=0,
    gepa_kwargs=None,                        # e.g. {"use_cloudpickle": True} for dynamic signatures
)

.compile(student, *, trainset, valset=None, teacher=None) — teacher is not currently used.

Data split guidance

DSPy's general prompt-optimizer docs often recommend a validation-heavy split, such as 20% train / 80% validation, because small prompt optimizers can overfit tiny trainsets. GEPA is different: maximize the training set and reserve only enough validation examples to represent downstream behavior. The Pareto frontier still needs a real valset, but GEPA learns from traces and textual feedback on training examples, so starving trainset hurts.

BetterTogether in DSPy 3.2.x

If you want a multi-stage optimizer loop, DSPy 3.2.0's BetterTogether now accepts arbitrary named optimizers instead of the older fixed prompt_optimizer / weight_optimizer pair:

optimizer = dspy.BetterTogether(
    metric=rich_metric,
    bootstrap=dspy.BootstrapFewShotWithRandomSearch(metric=rich_metric),
    gepa=dspy.GEPA(metric=rich_metric, auto="light", reflection_lm=reflection_lm),
)

optimized = optimizer.compile(
    student=program,
    trainset=trainset,
    valset=valset,
    strategy="bootstrap -> gepa",
)

Pass strategy= explicitly when you use named stages like bootstrap=... and gepa=.... DSPy 3.2.0's default strategy is still "p -> w -> p", which only works if your optimizer keys are literally p and w.

Keep plain GEPA as the default first pass. Reach for BetterTogether only when you have a specific reason to chain optimizers and want the valset to pick the best intermediate program.

When GEPA > MIPROv2

• Your metric can produce specific, teachable critiques (GEPA's superpower).
• The program has multiple predictors that need targeted improvements (GEPA gives per-predictor feedback; MIPRO doesn't).
• Rollout budget is small (GEPA converges faster with rich feedback).

When MIPROv2 > GEPA

• Metric is scalar-only (no signal to reflect on) — use dspy.MIPROv2.
• You want pure few-shot bootstrapping with no instruction mutation.
• Very large trainset (500+) where Bayesian search over demos pays off.

When SIMBA is worth trying

dspy.SIMBA is a lighter reflective optimizer. Try it when you want a cheaper reflective pass than GEPA, your program is simple, or you need quick exploration before committing to a full GEPA run. Keep GEPA as the default for multi-predictor programs where per-predictor feedback and Pareto candidate selection matter.

Resume & checkpointing

log_dir writes candidate programs + scores per round. To resume an interrupted run, point log_dir at the same directory — GEPA picks up from the last checkpoint. Inspect <log_dir>/candidates/ to see every proposed program.

Inference-time best-of with track_best_outputs

With track_best_outputs=True, GEPA records, per task, the best prediction seen across all candidates. At inference time on held-out data, you can ensemble or select among the top-Pareto programs for robustness. Access via optimized.detailed_results.best_outputs_valset.

Anti-patterns

• Float-only metric ("score is 0.7") with no feedback — GEPA collapses to random search.
• Same set used for train and val — Pareto selection overfits.
• reflection_lm = small model — it can't critique; use the strongest LM you can afford for this role.
• Running auto="heavy" on an untested metric — burn money to learn the metric was bugged. Run auto="light" first.
• Ignoring log_dir — losing a 4-hour run to a disconnect is very painful.

Gotcha: reflection_lm is required at construction, not compile

dspy.GEPA(...) asserts reflection_lm is not None (or a custom instruction_proposer) at init time — you cannot defer it to .compile(). If you see

AssertionError: GEPA requires a reflection language model...

add reflection_lm=dspy.LM("openai/gpt-5", temperature=1.0, max_tokens=32000) to the constructor, or substitute the strongest instruction-following model available on your provider. dspy.LM(...) is a cheap stub until you actually call it, so constructing one doesn't hit the network.

Next

• Build the metric → dspy-evaluation-harness.
• End-to-end pipeline → dspy-advanced-workflow.
• Parameter reference → reference.md.
• Runnable example → example_gepa.py.
• BetterTogether chaining example → example_bettertogether.py.