LLMs Can Get "Brain Rot"!

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.13928v1
• Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 13:28:49 GMT
• Title: LLMs Can Get "Brain Rot"!
• Authors: Shuo Xing, Junyuan Hong, Yifan Wang, Runjin Chen, Zhenyu Zhang, Ananth Grama, Zhengzhong Tu, Zhangyang Wang,
• Abstract summary: Continual exposure to junk web text induces lasting cognitive decline in large language models (LLMs)<n>We run controlled experiments on real Twitter/X corpora, constructing junk and reversely controlled datasets.<n>Results provide significant, multi-perspective evidence that data quality is a causal driver of LLM capability decay.
• Score: 68.08198331505695
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We propose and test the LLM Brain Rot Hypothesis: continual exposure to junk web text induces lasting cognitive decline in large language models (LLMs). To causally isolate data quality, we run controlled experiments on real Twitter/X corpora, constructing junk and reversely controlled datasets via two orthogonal operationalizations: M1 (engagement degree) and M2 (semantic quality), with matched token scale and training operations across conditions. Contrary to the control group, continual pre-training of 4 LLMs on the junk dataset causes non-trivial declines (Hedges' $g>0.3$) on reasoning, long-context understanding, safety, and inflating "dark traits" (e.g., psychopathy, narcissism). The gradual mixtures of junk and control datasets also yield dose-response cognition decay: for example, under M1, ARC-Challenge with Chain Of Thoughts drops $74.9 \rightarrow 57.2$ and RULER-CWE $84.4 \rightarrow 52.3$ as junk ratio rises from $0\%$ to $100\%$. Error forensics reveal several key insights. First, we identify thought-skipping as the primary lesion: models increasingly truncate or skip reasoning chains, explaining most of the error growth. Second, partial but incomplete healing is observed: scaling instruction tuning and clean data pre-training improve the declined cognition yet cannot restore baseline capability, suggesting persistent representational drift rather than format mismatch. Finally, we discover that the popularity, a non-semantic metric, of a tweet is a better indicator of the Brain Rot effect than the length in M1. Together, the results provide significant, multi-perspective evidence that data quality is a causal driver of LLM capability decay, reframing curation for continual pretraining as a \textit{training-time safety} problem and motivating routine "cognitive health checks" for deployed LLMs.

Related papers

• Are Reasoning LLMs Robust to Interventions on Their Chain-of-Thought? [79.86483056611105]
  Reasoning LLMs generate step-by-step chains of thought before giving an answer.<n>How robust are these reasoning traces to disruptions that occur within them?<n>We introduce a controlled evaluation framework that perturbs a model's own CoT at fixed timesteps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-07T10:02:58Z)
• Stalled, Biased, and Confused: Uncovering Reasoning Failures in LLMs for Cloud-Based Root Cause Analysis [5.532586951580959]
  We present a focused empirical evaluation that isolates an LLM's reasoning behavior.<n>We produce a labeled taxonomy of 16 common RCA reasoning failures and use an LLM-as-a-Judge for annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T18:23:26Z)
• QuCo-RAG: Quantifying Uncertainty from the Pre-training Corpus for Dynamic Retrieval-Augmented Generation [14.312693191309101]
  Dynamic Retrieval-Augmented Generation adaptively determines when to retrieve during generation to hallucinations in large language models.<n>We propose QuCo-RAG, which shifts from subjective confidence to objective statistics computed from pre-training data.<n>Our method quantifies uncertainty through two stages: (1) before generation, we identify low-frequency entities indicating long-tail knowledge gaps; (2) during generation, we verify entity co-occurrence in the pre-training corpus, where zero co-occurrence often signals hallucination risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-22T08:28:05Z)
• $\mathbf{T^3}$: Reducing Belief Deviation in Reinforcement Learning for Active Reasoning [25.588308192160685]
  We propose to track the deviation of model beliefs and develop $mathbfT3$, a simple yet effective method that detects excessive belief deviation and truncates trajectories during training to remove uninformative tails.<n>$mathbfT3$ consistently enhances training stability, token efficiency, and final performance, achieving up to 30% gains while cutting rollout tokens by roughly 25%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T08:14:49Z)
• Mitigating Spurious Correlations Between Question and Answer via Chain-of-Thought Correctness Perception Distillation [25.195244084313114]
  Chain-of-Thought Correctness Perception Distillation (CoPeD) aims to improve the reasoning quality of the student model.<n>CoPeD encourages the student model to predict answers based on correct rationales and revise them when they are incorrect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-06T05:33:17Z)
• Analyzing and Mitigating Object Hallucination: A Training Bias Perspective [108.09666587800781]
  We introduce a new benchmark, POPEv2, which consists of counterfactual images collected from the training data of LVLMs with certain objects masked.<n>We find that current LVLMs suffer from training bias: they fail to fully leverage their training data and hallucinate more frequently on images seen during training.<n>We propose Obliviate, an efficient and lightweight unlearning method designed to mitigate object hallucination via training bias unlearning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-06T15:51:02Z)
• Reason-to-Recommend: Using Interaction-of-Thought Reasoning to Enhance LLM Recommendation [9.282278040339138]
  $textbfR2Rec$ is a reasoning-enhanced recommendation framework.<n>It samples interaction chains from the user-item graph and converts them into structured interaction-of-thoughts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T14:16:44Z)
• The Surprising Effectiveness of Negative Reinforcement in LLM Reasoning [43.310209758380886]
  Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is a promising approach for training language models (LMs)<n>We decompose the learning signal into reinforcing correct responses and penalizing incorrect ones, referred to as Positive and Negative Sample Reinforcement (PSR and NSR)<n>We show that NSR works by suppressing incorrect generations and redistributing probability mass toward other plausible candidates, guided by the model's prior beliefs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T06:10:54Z)
• MIRAGE: Assessing Hallucination in Multimodal Reasoning Chains of MLLM [58.2298313720146]
  Multimodal hallucinations are multi-sourced and arise from diverse causes.<n>Existing benchmarks fail to adequately distinguish between perception-induced hallucinations and reasoning-induced hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T05:54:36Z)
• Unlearning Isn't Deletion: Investigating Reversibility of Machine Unlearning in LLMs [38.837810490068556]
  Unlearning in large language models (LLMs) aims to remove specified data, but its efficacy is typically assessed with task-level metrics like accuracy and perplexity.<n>We demonstrate that models can appear to forget while their original behavior is easily restored through minimal fine-tuning.<n>This phenomenon of emphreversibility suggests that information is merely suppressed, not genuinely erased.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T16:02:10Z)
• S$^2$R: Teaching LLMs to Self-verify and Self-correct via Reinforcement Learning [51.84977135926156]
  We introduce S$2$R, an efficient framework that enhances LLM reasoning by teaching models to self-verify and self-correct during inference.<n>Our results demonstrate that Qwen2.5-math-7B achieves an accuracy improvement from 51.0% to 81.6%, outperforming models trained on an equivalent amount of long-CoT distilled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T13:40:22Z)
• Verbosity $\neq$ Veracity: Demystify Verbosity Compensation Behavior of Large Language Models [8.846200844870767]
  We discover an understudied type of undesirable behavior of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We term Verbosity Compensation (VC) as similar to the hesitation behavior of humans under uncertainty.<n>We propose a simple yet effective cascade algorithm that replaces verbose responses with the other model-generated responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-12T15:15:20Z)
• Can Large Language Models Infer Causation from Correlation? [104.96351414570239]
  We test the pure causal inference skills of large language models (LLMs) We formulate a novel task Corr2Cause, which takes a set of correlational statements and determines the causal relationship between the variables. We show that these models achieve almost close to random performance on the task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T12:09:15Z)

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.