Diagnosing Model Editing via Knowledge Spectrum

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17482v1
• Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 08:16:04 GMT
• Title: Diagnosing Model Editing via Knowledge Spectrum
• Authors: Tsung-Hsuan Pan, Chung-Chi Chen, Hen-Hsen Huang, Hsin-Hsi Chen,
• Abstract summary: Existing editing methods often introduce unintended side effects, degrading model performance in unpredictable ways.<n>This paper proposes a systematic framework for categorizing knowledge based on its real-world popularity, the model's pre-edit familiarity, and the linguistic structure of the eliciting question.<n>We introduce the Knowledge-Diagnostic Framework,'' an adaptive strategy that tailors editing intensity to the diagnosed difficulty of a knowledge item.
• Score: 24.533008164820284
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Model editing, the process of efficiently modifying factual knowledge in pre-trained language models, is critical for maintaining their accuracy and relevance. However, existing editing methods often introduce unintended side effects, degrading model performance in unpredictable ways. While much research has focused on improving editing algorithms, the role of the target knowledge's intrinsic properties remains a significant, underexplored factor. This paper addresses this gap by first proposing the ``Knowledge Spectrum,'' a systematic framework for categorizing knowledge based on its real-world popularity, the model's pre-edit familiarity, and the linguistic structure of the eliciting question. Our empirical analysis reveals that these characteristics are strong predictors of editing success and stability. Informed by these findings, we introduce the ``Knowledge-Diagnostic Framework,'' an adaptive strategy that tailors editing intensity to the diagnosed difficulty of a knowledge item. We demonstrate that this framework significantly improves success rates for challenging edits while optimizing computational resources. Our work provides a more comprehensive understanding of the factors governing model editing.

Related papers

• EtCon: Edit-then-Consolidate for Reliable Knowledge Editing [85.20993502078899]
  We propose Edit-then-Consolidate, a novel knowledge editing paradigm that aims to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge editing methods and their real-world applicability.<n>Our framework consistently improves editing reliability and generalization under real-world evaluations, while better preserving locality and pre-trained capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-04T12:43:50Z)
• 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)
• Unveiling and Eliminating the Shortcut Learning for Locate-Then-Edit Knowledge Editing via Both Subject and Relation Awareness [15.781679300397562]
  Knowledge editing aims to alternate the target knowledge predicted by large language models.<n>We propose a novel two-stage optimization process that balances the learning of the subject feature and the relation feature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-04T15:06:46Z)
• Beyond Memorization: A Rigorous Evaluation Framework for Medical Knowledge Editing [72.8373875453882]
  knowledge editing (KE) has emerged as a promising approach to update specific facts in Large Language Models (LLMs) without the need for full retraining.<n>We propose a novel framework called MedEditBench to rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of existing KE methods in the medical domain.<n>Our findings indicate that current KE methods result in only superficial memorization of the injected information, failing to generalize to new scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-04T02:14:43Z)
• Revealing the Deceptiveness of Knowledge Editing: A Mechanistic Analysis of Superficial Editing [18.12933371693374]
  This paper introduces the concept of "superficial editing" to describe this phenomenon.<n>Our comprehensive evaluation reveals that this issue presents a significant challenge to existing algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T02:44:57Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Model Editing Harms General Abilities of Large Language Models: Regularization to the Rescue [122.20016030723043]
  We evaluate the side effects of model editing on large language models (LLMs) Our analysis reveals that the side effects are caused by model editing altering the original model weights excessively. To mitigate this, a method named RECT is proposed to regularize the edit update weights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-09T18:03:15Z)
• A Comprehensive Study of Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models [82.65729336401027]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown extraordinary capabilities in understanding and generating text that closely mirrors human communication. This paper defines the knowledge editing problem and provides a comprehensive review of cutting-edge approaches. We introduce a new benchmark, KnowEdit, for a comprehensive empirical evaluation of representative knowledge editing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-02T16:54:58Z)

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.