Mirage of Mastery: Memorization Tricks LLMs into Artificially Inflated Self-Knowledge

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.18998v1
• Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 18:01:16 GMT
• Title: Mirage of Mastery: Memorization Tricks LLMs into Artificially Inflated Self-Knowledge
• Authors: Sahil Kale, Vijaykant Nadadur,
• Abstract summary: Existing studies treat memorization and self-knowledge deficits in LLMs as separate issues.<n>We utilize a novel framework to ascertain if LLMs genuinely learn reasoning patterns from training data.<n>Our analysis shows a noteworthy problem in generalization: LLMs draw confidence from memorized solutions to infer a higher self-knowledge.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: When artificial intelligence mistakes memorization for intelligence, it creates a dangerous mirage of reasoning. Existing studies treat memorization and self-knowledge deficits in LLMs as separate issues and do not recognize an intertwining link that degrades the trustworthiness of LLM responses. In our study, we utilize a novel framework to ascertain if LLMs genuinely learn reasoning patterns from training data or merely memorize them to assume competence across problems of similar complexity focused on STEM domains. Our analysis shows a noteworthy problem in generalization: LLMs draw confidence from memorized solutions to infer a higher self-knowledge about their reasoning ability, which manifests as an over 45% inconsistency in feasibility assessments when faced with self-validated, logically coherent task perturbations. This effect is most pronounced in science and medicine domains, which tend to have maximal standardized jargon and problems, further confirming our approach. Significant wavering within the self-knowledge of LLMs also shows flaws in current architectures and training patterns, highlighting the need for techniques that ensure a balanced, consistent stance on models' perceptions of their own knowledge for maximum AI explainability and trustworthiness. Our code and results are available publicly at https://github.com/knowledge-verse-ai/LLM-Memorization_SK_Eval-.

Related papers

• Do LLMs Really Forget? Evaluating Unlearning with Knowledge Correlation and Confidence Awareness [44.37155305736321]
  Machine unlearning techniques aim to mitigate unintended memorization in large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose a knowledge unlearning evaluation framework that more accurately captures the implicit structure of real-world knowledge.<n>Our framework provides a more realistic and rigorous assessment of unlearning performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T04:35:19Z)
• Truly Assessing Fluid Intelligence of Large Language Models through Dynamic Reasoning Evaluation [75.26829371493189]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning capacities that mirror human-like thinking.<n>Existing reasoning benchmarks either focus on domain-specific knowledge (crystallized intelligence) or lack interpretability.<n>We propose DRE-Bench, a dynamic reasoning evaluation benchmark grounded in a hierarchical cognitive framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T09:01:08Z)
• Line of Duty: Evaluating LLM Self-Knowledge via Consistency in Feasibility Boundaries [0.0]
  This study aims to obtain intrinsic insights into different types of LLM self-knowledge with a novel methodology.<n>We find that even frontier models like GPT-4o and Mistral Large are not sure of their own capabilities more than 80% of the time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T10:07:07Z)
• Automatic Curriculum Expert Iteration for Reliable LLM Reasoning [60.60318625779015]
  Hallucinations (i.e., generating plausible but inaccurate content) and laziness (i.e. excessive refusals or defaulting to "I don't know") persist as major challenges in LLM reasoning.<n>Current efforts to reduce hallucinations primarily focus on factual errors in knowledge-grounded tasks, often neglecting hallucinations related to faulty reasoning.<n>We propose Automatic Curriculum Expert Iteration (Auto-CEI) to enhance LLM reasoning and align responses to the model's capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T05:43:07Z)
• Unveiling Factual Recall Behaviors of Large Language Models through Knowledge Neurons [13.266817091775042]
  We investigate whether Large Language Models (LLMs) actively recall or retrieve their internal repositories of factual knowledge when faced with reasoning tasks. We reveal that LLMs fail to harness the critical factual associations under certain circumstances. We assess the effect of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, a powerful technique for addressing complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T15:07:08Z)
• LLMs' Reading Comprehension Is Affected by Parametric Knowledge and Struggles with Hypothetical Statements [59.71218039095155]
  Task of reading comprehension (RC) provides a primary means to assess language models' natural language understanding (NLU) capabilities.<n>If the context aligns with the models' internal knowledge, it is hard to discern whether the models' answers stem from context comprehension or from internal information.<n>To address this issue, we suggest to use RC on imaginary data, based on fictitious facts and entities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T13:08:56Z)
• Untangle the KNOT: Interweaving Conflicting Knowledge and Reasoning Skills in Large Language Models [51.72963030032491]
  Knowledge documents for large language models (LLMs) may conflict with the memory of LLMs due to outdated or incorrect knowledge. We construct a new dataset, dubbed KNOT, for knowledge conflict resolution examination in the form of question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T16:40:11Z)
• KnowTuning: Knowledge-aware Fine-tuning for Large Language Models [83.5849717262019]
  We propose a knowledge-aware fine-tuning (KnowTuning) method to improve fine-grained and coarse-grained knowledge awareness of LLMs. KnowTuning generates more facts with less factual error rate under fine-grained facts evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-17T02:54:32Z)
• Self-Alignment for Factuality: Mitigating Hallucinations in LLMs via Self-Evaluation [71.91287418249688]
  Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with factual inaccuracies, even when they hold relevant knowledge. We leverage the self-evaluation capability of an LLM to provide training signals that steer the model towards factuality. We show that the proposed self-alignment approach substantially enhances factual accuracy over Llama family models across three key knowledge-intensive tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T15:52:42Z)
• Learning to Trust Your Feelings: Leveraging Self-awareness in LLMs for Hallucination Mitigation [9.730412606588335]
  We evaluate the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to discern and express their internal knowledge state. We propose a Reinforcement Learning from Knowledge Feedback (RLKF) training framework, leveraging reinforcement learning to enhance the factuality and honesty of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-27T16:19:30Z)
• Examining LLMs' Uncertainty Expression Towards Questions Outside Parametric Knowledge [35.067234242461545]
  Large language models (LLMs) express uncertainty in situations where they lack sufficient parametric knowledge to generate reasonable responses. This work aims to systematically investigate LLMs' behaviors in such situations, emphasizing the trade-off between honesty and helpfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T10:02:40Z)
• RECALL: A Benchmark for LLMs Robustness against External Counterfactual Knowledge [69.79676144482792]
  This study aims to evaluate the ability of LLMs to distinguish reliable information from external knowledge. Our benchmark consists of two tasks, Question Answering and Text Generation, and for each task, we provide models with a context containing counterfactual information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T13:24:19Z)

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.