Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

DUnE: Dataset for Unified Editing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.16087 v1 pith:ZNTAHH5R submitted 2023-11-27 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords editinglanguageduneeditmodelmodelsapproachesbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Even the most advanced language models remain susceptible to errors necessitating to modify these models without initiating a comprehensive retraining process. Model editing refers to the modification of a model's knowledge or representations in a manner that produces the desired outcomes. Prior research primarily centered around editing factual data e.g. "Messi plays for Inter Miami" confining the definition of an edit to a knowledge triplet i.e. (subject, object, relation). However, as the applications of language models expand, so do the diverse ways in which we wish to edit and refine their outputs. In this study, we broaden the scope of the editing problem to include an array of editing cases such as debiasing and rectifying reasoning errors and define an edit as any natural language expression that solicits a change in the model's outputs. We are introducing DUnE-an editing benchmark where edits are natural language sentences and propose that DUnE presents a challenging yet relevant task. To substantiate this claim, we conduct an extensive series of experiments testing various editing approaches to address DUnE, demonstrating their respective strengths and weaknesses. We show that retrieval-augmented language modeling can outperform specialized editing techniques and neither set of approaches has fully solved the generalized editing problem covered by our benchmark.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Robust Knowledge Editing via Explicit Reasoning Chains for Distractor-Resilient Multi-Hop QA

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Teaching an LLM to emit a fixed four-stage reasoning chain during fine-tuning makes single-pass multi-hop knowledge editing robust to distractor facts.

Pith tools