Evaluating Dependencies in Fact Editing for Language Models: Specificity and Implication Awareness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.01858v1
• Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:45:30 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Dependencies in Fact Editing for Language Models: Specificity and Implication Awareness
• Authors: Zichao Li, Ines Arous, Siva Reddy, Jackie C.K. Cheung
• Abstract summary: We aim to ensure that the editing of learned facts respects internal logical constraints, which are known as dependency of knowledge. Existing work on editing LLMs has partially addressed the issue of dependency, when the editing of a fact should apply to its lexical variations without disrupting irrelevant ones. We propose an evaluation protocol with an accompanying question-answering dataset, DepEdit, that provides a comprehensive assessment of the editing process.
• Score: 26.589633375359647
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: The potential of using a large language model (LLM) as a knowledge base (KB) has sparked significant interest. To manage the knowledge acquired by LLMs, we need to ensure that the editing of learned facts respects internal logical constraints, which are known as dependency of knowledge. Existing work on editing LLMs has partially addressed the issue of dependency, when the editing of a fact should apply to its lexical variations without disrupting irrelevant ones. However, they neglect the dependency between a fact and its logical implications. We propose an evaluation protocol with an accompanying question-answering dataset, DepEdit, that provides a comprehensive assessment of the editing process considering the above notions of dependency. Our protocol involves setting up a controlled environment in which we edit facts and monitor their impact on LLMs, along with their implications based on If-Then rules. Extensive experiments on DepEdit show that existing knowledge editing methods are sensitive to the surface form of knowledge, and that they have limited performance in inferring the implications of edited facts.

Related papers

• Uncovering Overfitting in Large Language Model Editing [35.55260822503773]
  We identify and investigate the phenomenon of Editing Overfit, where edited models assign disproportionately high probabilities to the edit target. We propose a new plug-and-play strategy called Learn to Inference (LTI), which introduce a Multi-stage Inference Constraint module to guide the edited models in recalling new knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T11:09:00Z)
• How Well Can Knowledge Edit Methods Edit Perplexing Knowledge? [18.022428746019582]
  This study investigates the capability of knowledge editing methods to incorporate new knowledge with varying degrees of "perplexingness" We find significant negative correlations between the "perplexingness" of the new knowledge and the edit efficacy across all 12 scenarios. Further exploration into the influence of knowledge hierarchy on editing outcomes indicates that knowledge positioned at higher hierarchical levels is more challenging to modify in some scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T03:41:02Z)
• Editing the Mind of Giants: An In-Depth Exploration of Pitfalls of Knowledge Editing in Large Language Models [26.516571783335824]
  Recent studies have identified side effects, such as knowledge distortion and the deterioration of general abilities, that have emerged after editing. This survey presents a comprehensive study of these side effects, providing a unified perspective on the challenges of knowledge editing in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T15:28:21Z)
• Editing Conceptual Knowledge for Large Language Models [65.38231526537476]
  This paper pioneers the investigation of editing conceptual knowledge for Large Language Models (LLMs) We construct a novel benchmark dataset ConceptEdit and establish a suite of new metrics for evaluation. experimental results reveal that, although existing editing methods can efficiently modify concept-level definition to some extent, they also have the potential to distort the related instantial knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-10T16:57:10Z)
• Learning to Edit: Aligning LLMs with Knowledge Editing [101.96620267293731]
  We propose a Learning to Edit (LTE) framework, focusing on teaching large language models to apply updated knowledge into input questions. LTE features a two-phase process: (i) the Alignment Phase, which fine-tunes LLMs on a meticulously curated parallel dataset to make reliable, in-scope edits. We demonstrate LTE's superiority in knowledge editing performance, robustness in both batch and sequential editing, minimal interference on general tasks, and rapid editing speeds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T07:45:17Z)
• EVEDIT: Event-based Knowledge Editing with Deductive Editing Boundaries [69.72012539060731]
  We introduce a theoretical framework for efficient knowledge editing (KE) in large language models (LLMs) We propose a novel task of event-based knowledge editing that pairs facts with event descriptions. We empirically demonstrate the superiority of event-based editing over the existing setting on resolving uncertainty in edited models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-17T16:34:50Z)
• On the Robustness of Editing Large Language Models [57.477943944826904]
  Large language models (LLMs) have played a pivotal role in building communicative AI, yet they encounter the challenge of efficient updates. This work seeks to understand the strengths and limitations of editing methods, facilitating practical applications of communicative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T17:06:45Z)
• A Comprehensive Study of Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models [82.65729336401027]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown extraordinary capabilities in understanding and generating text that closely mirrors human communication. This paper defines the knowledge editing problem and provides a comprehensive review of cutting-edge approaches. We introduce a new benchmark, KnowEdit, for a comprehensive empirical evaluation of representative knowledge editing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-02T16:54:58Z)
• Unveiling the Pitfalls of Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models [41.83423510576848]
  It is still unclear whether knowledge editing might introduce side effects that pose potential risks or not. This paper pioneers the investigation into the potential pitfalls associated with knowledge editing for Large Language Models. Experimental results vividly demonstrate that knowledge editing might inadvertently cast a shadow of unintended consequences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T15:10:46Z)
• Eva-KELLM: A New Benchmark for Evaluating Knowledge Editing of LLMs [54.22416829200613]
  Eva-KELLM is a new benchmark for evaluating knowledge editing of large language models. Experimental results indicate that the current methods for knowledge editing using raw documents are not effective in yielding satisfactory results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-19T09:17:19Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.