Context Robust Knowledge Editing for Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23026v1
• Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 03:11:53 GMT
• Title: Context Robust Knowledge Editing for Language Models
• Authors: Haewon Park, Gyubin Choi, Minjun Kim, Yohan Jo,
• Abstract summary: We develop CHED, a benchmark designed to evaluate the context robustness of knowledge editing methods.<n> Evaluations on CHED show that they often fail when preceding contexts are present.<n>We introduce CoRE, a KE method designed to strengthen context robustness.
• Score: 10.634048842551662
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Knowledge editing (KE) methods offer an efficient way to modify knowledge in large language models. Current KE evaluations typically assess editing success by considering only the edited knowledge without any preceding contexts. In real-world applications, however, preceding contexts often trigger the retrieval of the original knowledge and undermine the intended edit. To address this issue, we develop CHED -- a benchmark designed to evaluate the context robustness of KE methods. Evaluations on CHED show that they often fail when preceding contexts are present. To mitigate this shortcoming, we introduce CoRE, a KE method designed to strengthen context robustness by minimizing context-sensitive variance in hidden states of the model for edited knowledge. This method not only improves the editing success rate in situations where a preceding context is present but also preserves the overall capabilities of the model. We provide an in-depth analysis of the differing impacts of preceding contexts when introduced as user utterances versus assistant responses, and we dissect attention-score patterns to assess how specific tokens influence editing success.

Related papers

• Retention analysis of edited knowledge after fine-tuning [5.440397659472036]
  Large language models (LLMs) store vast amounts of knowledge, which often requires updates to correct factual errors, incorporate newly acquired information, or adapt model behavior.<n>Model editing methods have emerged as efficient solutions for such updates, offering localized and precise knowledge modification at significantly lower computational cost than continual training.<n>However, the effect of fine-tuning on previously edited knowledge remains poorly understood.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T15:51:19Z)
• ScEdit: Script-based Assessment of Knowledge Editing [13.628279976661934]
  Knowledge Editing (KE) has gained increasing attention, yet current KE tasks remain relatively simple.<n>We introduce a novel script-based benchmark -- ScEdit (Script-based Knowledge Editing Benchmark) -- which encompasses both counterfactual and temporal edits.<n>We observe that all KE methods exhibit a drop in performance on established metrics and face challenges on text-level metrics, indicating a challenging task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T09:42:25Z)
• The Mirage of Model Editing: Revisiting Evaluation in the Wild [70.17413507444704]
  We introduce QAEdit, a new benchmark aligned with widely used question answering (QA) datasets, and WILD, a task-agnostic evaluation framework.<n>Our single editing experiments show that current editing methods perform substantially worse than previously reported.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T15:57:55Z)
• Related Knowledge Perturbation Matters: Rethinking Multiple Pieces of Knowledge Editing in Same-Subject [49.559994791305535]
  Current state-of-the-art editing methods struggle when tasked with editing multiple related knowledge pieces for the same subject.<n>We introduce the $textS2textRKE$(Same-Subject Related Knowledge Editing) benchmark.<n>Our experiments reveal that only mainstream locate-then-edit methods, such as ROME and MEMIT, exhibit "related knowledge perturbation"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T04:47:17Z)
• On the Loss of Context-awareness in General Instruction Fine-tuning [101.03941308894191]
  We investigate the loss of context awareness after supervised fine-tuning.<n>We find that the performance decline is associated with a bias toward different roles learned during conversational instruction fine-tuning.<n>We propose a metric to identify context-dependent examples from general instruction fine-tuning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-05T00:16:01Z)
• In-Context Editing: Learning Knowledge from Self-Induced Distributions [29.10148782152867]
  We introduce Consistent In-Context Editing (ICE) to optimize toward a contextual distribution rather than a one-hot target.<n>ICE enhances the robustness and effectiveness of gradient-based tuning methods, preventing overfitting and preserving the model's integrity.<n>We analyze ICE across four critical aspects of knowledge editing: accuracy, locality, generalization, and linguistic quality, demonstrating its advantages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T04:00:04Z)
• Everything is Editable: Extend Knowledge Editing to Unstructured Data in Large Language Models [65.10456412127405]
  We propose a novel Unstructured Knowledge Editing method, namely UnKE.<n>In the layer dimension, we propose non-local block key-value storage to replace local layer key-value storage.<n>In the token dimension, we replace "term-driven optimization" with "cause-driven optimization", which edits the last token directly while preserving context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T08:42:40Z)
• Robust and Scalable Model Editing for Large Language Models [75.95623066605259]
  We propose EREN (Edit models by REading Notes) to improve the scalability and robustness of LLM editing. Unlike existing techniques, it can integrate knowledge from multiple edits, and correctly respond to syntactically similar but semantically unrelated inputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T06:57:23Z)
• AKEW: Assessing Knowledge Editing in the Wild [79.96813982502952]
  AKEW (Assessing Knowledge Editing in the Wild) is a new practical benchmark for knowledge editing. It fully covers three editing settings of knowledge updates: structured facts, unstructured texts as facts, and extracted triplets. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate the considerable gap between state-of-the-art knowledge-editing methods and practical scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T07:08:34Z)
• 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)
• Propagation and Pitfalls: Reasoning-based Assessment of Knowledge Editing through Counterfactual Tasks [36.292901021210575]
  We introduce a novel reasoning-based benchmark -- ReCoE (Reasoning-based Counterfactual Editing dataset) We conduct a thorough analysis of existing knowledge editing techniques, including input augmentation, finetuning, and locate-and-edit. All model editing methods show notably low performance on this dataset, especially in certain reasoning schemes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-31T04:12:59Z)

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.