Can Knowledge Editing Really Correct Hallucinations?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16251v2
• Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 18:00:01 GMT
• Title: Can Knowledge Editing Really Correct Hallucinations?
• Authors: Baixiang Huang, Canyu Chen, Xiongxiao Xu, Ali Payani, Kai Shu,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) suffer from hallucinations, referring to the non-factual information in generated content, despite their superior capacities across tasks. knowledge editing has been developed as a new popular paradigm to correct the erroneous factual knowledge encoded in LLMs with the advantage of avoiding retraining from scratch. We propose HalluEditBench to holistically benchmark knowledge editing methods in correcting real-world hallucinations.
• Score: 16.311982837980345
• License:
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) suffer from hallucinations, referring to the non-factual information in generated content, despite their superior capacities across tasks. Meanwhile, knowledge editing has been developed as a new popular paradigm to correct the erroneous factual knowledge encoded in LLMs with the advantage of avoiding retraining from scratch. However, one common issue of existing evaluation datasets for knowledge editing is that they do not ensure LLMs actually generate hallucinated answers to the evaluation questions before editing. When LLMs are evaluated on such datasets after being edited by different techniques, it is hard to directly adopt the performance to assess the effectiveness of different knowledge editing methods in correcting hallucinations. Thus, the fundamental question remains insufficiently validated: Can knowledge editing really correct hallucinations in LLMs? We proposed HalluEditBench to holistically benchmark knowledge editing methods in correcting real-world hallucinations. First, we rigorously construct a massive hallucination dataset with 9 domains, 26 topics and more than 6,000 hallucinations. Then, we assess the performance of knowledge editing methods in a holistic way on five dimensions including Efficacy, Generalization, Portability, Locality, and Robustness. Through HalluEditBench, we have provided new insights into the potentials and limitations of different knowledge editing methods in correcting hallucinations, which could inspire future improvements and facilitate the progress in the field of knowledge editing.

Related papers

• AlphaEdit: Null-Space Constrained Knowledge Editing for Language Models [65.93240009586351]
  Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit hallucinations due to incorrect or outdated knowledge. We introduce AlphaEdit, a novel solution that projects perturbation onto the null space of the preserved knowledge before applying it to the parameters. We theoretically prove that this projection ensures the output of post-edited LLMs remains unchanged when queried about the preserved knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T10:06:27Z)
• 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)
• Editing Factual Knowledge and Explanatory Ability of Medical Large Language Models [89.13883089162951]
  Model editing aims to precisely alter the behaviors of large language models (LLMs) in relation to specific knowledge. This approach has proven effective in addressing issues of hallucination and outdated information in LLMs. However, the potential of using model editing to modify knowledge in the medical field remains largely unexplored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-28T06:40:57Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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.