KCR: Resolving Long-Context Knowledge Conflicts via Reasoning in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.01273v2
• Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2025 11:26:20 GMT
• Title: KCR: Resolving Long-Context Knowledge Conflicts via Reasoning in LLMs
• Authors: Xianda Zheng, Zijian Huang, Meng-Fen Chiang, Michael J. Witbrock, Kaiqi Zhao,
• Abstract summary: We propose the Knowledge Conflict Reasoning (KCR) framework, which enhances the ability of LLMs to resolve conflicting knowledge.<n>Key idea of KCR is to train backbone LLMs to establish a correct reasoning process by rewarding them for selecting and adhering to the context.<n>We employ Reinforcement Learning to encourage the model to learn the paradigm of reasoning process that follows correct reasoning paths rather than the incorrect counterparts.
• Score: 4.4180007117819935
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Knowledge conflicts commonly arise across diverse sources, and their prevalence has increased with the advent of LLMs. When dealing with conflicts between multiple contexts, also known as \emph{inter-context knowledge conflicts}, LLMs are often confused by lengthy and conflicting contexts. To address this challenge, we propose the Knowledge Conflict Reasoning (KCR) framework, which enhances the ability of LLMs to resolve conflicting knowledge. The key idea of KCR is to train backbone LLMs to establish a correct reasoning process by rewarding them for selecting and adhering to the context with stronger logical consistency when presented with conflicting contexts. Specifically, we first extract reasoning paths, represented by either text or local knowledge graphs, from the conflicting long contexts. Subsequently, we employ Reinforcement Learning to encourage the model to learn the paradigm of reasoning process that follows correct reasoning paths rather than the incorrect counterparts. This enables the backbone models to genuinely acquire the capability to resolve inter-context knowledge conflicts within long contexts. Experimental results demonstrate that our framework significantly improves the ability of various backbone models to resolve knowledge conflicts in long-context scenarios, yielding substantial performance gains.

Related papers

• MAGIC: A Multi-Hop and Graph-Based Benchmark for Inter-Context Conflicts in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [4.177310099979434]
  Knowledge conflict often arises in RAG systems, where retrieved documents may be inconsistent with one another or contradict the model's parametric knowledge.<n>We propose a knowledge graph (KG)-based framework that generates varied and subtle conflicts between two similar yet distinct contexts.<n> Experimental results on our benchmark, MAGIC, provide intriguing insights into the inner workings of LLMs regarding knowledge conflict.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-29T07:19:49Z)
• Improving Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Language Models through Dialectic Reasoning Argumentations [65.11348389219887]
  We introduce Dialectic-RAG (DRAG), a modular approach that evaluates retrieved information by comparing, contrasting, and resolving conflicting perspectives.<n>We show the impact of our framework both as an in-context learning strategy and for constructing demonstrations to instruct smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T06:55:15Z)
• Failure Modes of LLMs for Causal Reasoning on Narratives [51.19592551510628]
  We investigate the interaction between world knowledge and logical reasoning.<n>We find that state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) often rely on superficial generalizations.<n>We show that simple reformulations of the task can elicit more robust reasoning behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T12:48:58Z)
• ECon: On the Detection and Resolution of Evidence Conflicts [56.89209046429291]
  The rise of large language models (LLMs) has significantly influenced the quality of information in decision-making systems. This study introduces a method for generating diverse, validated evidence conflicts to simulate real-world misinformation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T07:41:17Z)
• ConflictBank: A Benchmark for Evaluating the Influence of Knowledge Conflicts in LLM [36.332500824079844]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive advancements across numerous disciplines, yet the critical issue of knowledge conflicts has rarely been studied. We present ConflictBank, the first comprehensive benchmark developed to evaluate knowledge conflicts from three aspects. Our investigation delves into four model families and twelve LLM instances, meticulously analyzing conflicts stemming from misinformation, temporal discrepancies, and semantic divergences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T02:33:13Z)
• 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)
• Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A Survey [24.731074825915833]
  Survey focuses on three categories of knowledge conflicts: context-memory, inter-context, and intra-memory conflict. These conflicts can significantly impact the trustworthiness and performance of large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-13T08:02:23Z)
• Resolving Knowledge Conflicts in Large Language Models [46.903549751371415]
  Large language models (LLMs) often encounter knowledge conflicts. We ask what are the desiderata for LLMs when a knowledge conflict arises and whether existing LLMs fulfill them. We introduce an evaluation framework for simulating contextual knowledge conflicts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T06:57:45Z)
• Skills-in-Context Prompting: Unlocking Compositionality in Large Language Models [68.18370230899102]
  We investigate how to elicit compositional generalization capabilities in large language models (LLMs) We find that demonstrating both foundational skills and compositional examples grounded in these skills within the same prompt context is crucial. We show that fine-tuning LLMs with SKiC-style data can elicit zero-shot weak-to-strong generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-01T05:54:12Z)

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.