We validate our _Evol-Instruct_ by fine-tuning open-source LLaMA [4] with our evolved instructions and evaluating its performance similar to existing SOTA works (e.g., Alpaca [31] and Vicuna [22]) on instruction finetuning. The instruction datasets we compare with are the data used by Alpaca (generated using self-instruct [32]) and the 70k ShareGPT (shared by real users) used by Vicuna. To prove that the instruction dataset from our method is superior to human-created instruction datasets, we select Alpaca's training data (generated from only 175 human-created seed instructions) as the initial dataset. We execute four epochs of evolution using OpenAI ChatGPT API5 and finally obtain 250k instructions. To ensure a fair comparison with Vicuna's 70k real user data, we sampled an equal amount from the full 250k data and trained the LLaMA 7B model. We name our model _WizardLM_. Due to the low proportion of difficult instructions in the previous instruction-following test dataset, we manually created a new difficulty-balanced test dataset, named _Evol-Instruct_ testset. We hire annotators and leverage GPT-4 to evaluate Alpaca, Vicuna, ChatGPT, and _WizardLM_ on _Evol-Instruct_ testset and Vicuna's testset.