Evaluating Latent Knowledge of Public Tabular Datasets in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.20351v1
• Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2025 08:51:14 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Latent Knowledge of Public Tabular Datasets in Large Language Models
• Authors: Matteo Silvestri, Flavio Giorgi, Fabrizio Silvestri, Gabriele Tolomei,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated on their ability to reason over structured data.<n>We show that contamination effects emerge exclusively for datasets containing strong semantic cues.<n>LLMs' apparent competence may, in part, reflect memorization of publicly available datasets rather than genuine generalization.
• Score: 11.991760171708796
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated on their ability to reason over structured data, yet such assessments often overlook a crucial confound: dataset contamination. In this work, we investigate whether LLMs exhibit prior knowledge of widely used tabular benchmarks such as Adult Income, Titanic, and others. Through a series of controlled probing experiments, we reveal that contamination effects emerge exclusively for datasets containing strong semantic cues-for instance, meaningful column names or interpretable value categories. In contrast, when such cues are removed or randomized, performance sharply declines to near-random levels. These findings suggest that LLMs' apparent competence on tabular reasoning tasks may, in part, reflect memorization of publicly available datasets rather than genuine generalization. We discuss implications for evaluation protocols and propose strategies to disentangle semantic leakage from authentic reasoning ability in future LLM assessments.

Related papers

• Mitigating Hidden Confounding by Progressive Confounder Imputation via Large Language Models [46.92706900119399]
  We make the first attempt to mitigate hidden confounding using large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose ProCI, a framework that elicits the semantic and world knowledge of LLMs to iteratively generate, impute, and validate hidden confounders.<n>Extensive experiments demonstrate that ProCI uncovers meaningful confounders and significantly improves treatment effect estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-26T03:49:13Z)
• Verifying the Verifiers: Unveiling Pitfalls and Potentials in Fact Verifiers [59.168391398830515]
  We evaluate 12 pre-trained LLMs and one specialized fact-verifier, using a collection of examples from 14 fact-checking benchmarks.<n>We highlight the importance of addressing annotation errors and ambiguity in datasets.<n> frontier LLMs with few-shot in-context examples, often overlooked in previous works, achieve top-tier performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-16T10:32:10Z)
• Latent Factor Models Meets Instructions: Goal-conditioned Latent Factor Discovery without Task Supervision [50.45597801390757]
  Instruct-LF is a goal-oriented latent factor discovery system.<n>It integrates instruction-following ability with statistical models to handle noisy datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T02:03:08Z)
• Does Data Contamination Detection Work (Well) for LLMs? A Survey and Evaluation on Detection Assumptions [20.51842378080194]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great performance across various benchmarks, showing potential as general-purpose task solvers.<n>As LLMs are typically trained on vast amounts of data, a significant concern in their evaluation is data contamination.<n>We systematically review 50 papers on data contamination detection, categorize the underlying assumptions, and assess whether they have been rigorously validated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T17:58:22Z)
• CEB: Compositional Evaluation Benchmark for Fairness in Large Language Models [58.57987316300529]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed to handle various natural language processing (NLP) tasks.<n>To evaluate the biases exhibited by LLMs, researchers have recently proposed a variety of datasets.<n>We propose CEB, a Compositional Evaluation Benchmark that covers different types of bias across different social groups and tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T16:31:37Z)
• Test of Time: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs on Temporal Reasoning [20.066249913943405]
  Large language models (LLMs) have showcased remarkable reasoning capabilities, yet they remain susceptible to errors. We introduce novel synthetic datasets specifically designed to assess LLM temporal reasoning abilities in various scenarios. Our findings provide valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of current LLMs in temporal reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T14:31:19Z)
• Understanding Privacy Risks of Embeddings Induced by Large Language Models [75.96257812857554]
  Large language models show early signs of artificial general intelligence but struggle with hallucinations. One promising solution is to store external knowledge as embeddings, aiding LLMs in retrieval-augmented generation. Recent studies experimentally showed that the original text can be partially reconstructed from text embeddings by pre-trained language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-25T13:10:48Z)
• Unleashing the Potential of Large Language Models for Predictive Tabular Tasks in Data Science [17.282770819829913]
  This research endeavors to apply Large Language Models (LLMs) towards addressing these predictive tasks.<n>Our research aims to mitigate this gap by compiling a comprehensive corpus of tables annotated with instructions and executing large-scale training of Llama-2.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-29T14:41:21Z)
• KIEval: A Knowledge-grounded Interactive Evaluation Framework for Large Language Models [53.84677081899392]
  KIEval is a Knowledge-grounded Interactive Evaluation framework for large language models. It incorporates an LLM-powered "interactor" role for the first time to accomplish a dynamic contamination-resilient evaluation. Extensive experiments on seven leading LLMs across five datasets validate KIEval's effectiveness and generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-23T01:30:39Z)
• Discovering and Reasoning of Causality in the Hidden World with Large Language Models [109.62442253177376]
  We develop a new framework termed Causal representatiOn AssistanT (COAT) to propose useful measured variables for causal discovery.<n>Instead of directly inferring causality with Large language models (LLMs), COAT constructs feedback from intermediate causal discovery results to LLMs to refine the proposed variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T12:18:54Z)
• FactCHD: Benchmarking Fact-Conflicting Hallucination Detection [64.4610684475899]
  FactCHD is a benchmark designed for the detection of fact-conflicting hallucinations from LLMs. FactCHD features a diverse dataset that spans various factuality patterns, including vanilla, multi-hop, comparison, and set operation. We introduce Truth-Triangulator that synthesizes reflective considerations by tool-enhanced ChatGPT and LoRA-tuning based on Llama2.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T16:27:49Z)
• Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds [59.71218039095155]
  We evaluate language understanding capacities on simple inference tasks that most humans find trivial. We target (i) grammatically-specified entailments, (ii) premises with evidential adverbs of uncertainty, and (iii) monotonicity entailments. The models exhibit moderate to low performance on these evaluation sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T06:41:09Z)
• Memorization vs. Generalization: Quantifying Data Leakage in NLP Performance Evaluation [4.98030422694461]
  Public datasets are often used to evaluate the efficacy and generalizability of state-of-the-art methods for many tasks in natural language processing (NLP) The presence of overlap between the train and test datasets can lead to inflated results, inadvertently evaluating the model's ability to memorize and interpreting it as the ability to generalize. We identify leakage of training data into test data on several publicly available datasets used to evaluate NLP tasks, including named entity recognition and relation extraction, and study them to assess the impact of that leakage on the model's ability to memorize versus generalize.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-03T00:58:45Z)

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.