Dated Data: Tracing Knowledge Cutoffs in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12958v2
• Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 17:25:40 GMT
• Title: Dated Data: Tracing Knowledge Cutoffs in Large Language Models
• Authors: Jeffrey Cheng, Marc Marone, Orion Weller, Dawn Lawrie, Daniel Khashabi, Benjamin Van Durme,
• Abstract summary: We propose a simple approach to estimate effective cutoffs on the resource-level temporal alignment of an LLM. We find that effective cutoffs often differ from reported cutoffs. Our analysis reveals two reasons for these inconsistencies: (1) temporal biases of CommonCrawl data due to non-trivial amounts of old data in new dumps and (2) complications in LLM deduplication schemes involving semantic duplicates and lexical near-duplicates.
• Score: 47.987664966633865
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Released Large Language Models (LLMs) are often paired with a claimed knowledge cutoff date, or the dates at which training data was gathered. Such information is crucial for applications where the LLM must provide up to date information. However, this statement only scratches the surface: do all resources in the training data share the same knowledge cutoff date? Does the model's demonstrated knowledge for these subsets closely align to their cutoff dates? In this work, we define the notion of an effective cutoff. This is distinct from the LLM designer reported cutoff and applies separately to sub-resources and topics. We propose a simple approach to estimate effective cutoffs on the resource-level temporal alignment of an LLM by probing across versions of the data. Using this analysis, we find that effective cutoffs often differ from reported cutoffs. To understand the root cause of this observation, we conduct a direct large-scale analysis on open pre-training datasets. Our analysis reveals two reasons for these inconsistencies: (1) temporal biases of CommonCrawl data due to non-trivial amounts of old data in new dumps and (2) complications in LLM deduplication schemes involving semantic duplicates and lexical near-duplicates. Overall, our results show that knowledge cutoffs are not as simple as they have seemed and that care must be taken both by LLM dataset curators as well as practitioners who seek to use information from these models.

Related papers

• LLM Unlearning via Loss Adjustment with Only Forget Data [20.310423152885217]
  We introduce Forget data only Loss AjustmenT (FLAT), a "flat" loss adjustment approach which addresses these issues. Empirical results demonstrate that our approach achieves superior unlearning performance compared to existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T23:43:33Z)
• Formality is Favored: Unraveling the Learning Preferences of Large Language Models on Data with Conflicting Knowledge [55.65162959527848]
  Large language models have shown excellent performance on many knowledge-intensive tasks. However, pretraining data tends to contain misleading and even conflicting information. This study systematically analyze LLMs' learning preferences for data with conflicting knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T06:49:41Z)
• Entropy Law: The Story Behind Data Compression and LLM Performance [115.70395740286422]
  We find that model performance is negatively correlated to the compression ratio of training data, which usually yields a lower training loss. Based on the findings of the entropy law, we propose a quite efficient and universal data selection method. We also present an interesting application of entropy law that can detect potential performance risks at the beginning of model training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-09T08:14:29Z)
• PISTOL: Dataset Compilation Pipeline for Structural Unlearning of LLMs [31.16117964915814]
  Machine unlearning, which seeks to erase specific data stored in the pre-trained or fine-tuned models, has emerged as a crucial protective measure for LLMs. To facilitate the development of structural unlearning methods, we propose PISTOL, a pipeline for compiling multi-scenario datasets. We conduct benchmarks with four distinct unlearning methods on both Llama2-7B and Mistral-7B models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T17:22:36Z)
• Can LLMs Separate Instructions From Data? And What Do We Even Mean By That? [60.50127555651554]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) show impressive results in numerous practical applications, but they lack essential safety features. This makes them vulnerable to manipulations such as indirect prompt injections and generally unsuitable for safety-critical tasks. We introduce a formal measure for instruction-data separation and an empirical variant that is calculable from a model's outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T15:48:56Z)
• Alpaca against Vicuna: Using LLMs to Uncover Memorization of LLMs [61.04246774006429]
  We introduce a black-box prompt optimization method that uses an attacker LLM agent to uncover higher levels of memorization in a victim agent. We observe that our instruction-based prompts generate outputs with 23.7% higher overlap with training data compared to the baseline prefix-suffix measurements. Our findings show that instruction-tuned models can expose pre-training data as much as their base-models, if not more so, and using instructions proposed by other LLMs can open a new avenue of automated attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-05T19:32:01Z)
• On Inter-dataset Code Duplication and Data Leakage in Large Language Models [4.148857672591562]
  This paper explores the phenomenon of inter-dataset code duplication and its impact on evaluating large language models (LLMs) Our findings reveal a potential threat to the evaluation of LLMs across multiple SE tasks, stemming from the inter-dataset code duplication phenomenon. We provide evidence that open-source models could be affected by inter-dataset duplication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-15T19:46:40Z)
• Can Large Language Models Infer Causation from Correlation? [104.96351414570239]
  We test the pure causal inference skills of large language models (LLMs) We formulate a novel task Corr2Cause, which takes a set of correlational statements and determines the causal relationship between the variables. We show that these models achieve almost close to random performance on the task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T12:09:15Z)

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.