Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

AdaCAD: Adaptively Decoding to Balance Conflicts between Contextual and Parametric Knowledge

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 2409.07394 v2 pith:UHBTTBK6 submitted 2024-09-11 cs.CL

AdaCAD: Adaptively Decoding to Balance Conflicts between Contextual and Parametric Knowledge

classification cs.CL
keywords conflictadacadknowledgecontextcontrastivedecodingmethodswhen
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Knowledge conflict arises from discrepancies between information in the context of a large language model (LLM) and the knowledge stored in its parameters. This can hurt performance when using standard decoding techniques, which tend to ignore the context. Existing test-time contrastive methods seek to address this by comparing the LLM's output distribution with and without the context and adjust the model according to the contrast between them. However, we find that these methods frequently misjudge the degree of conflict and struggle to handle instances that vary in their amount of conflict, with static methods over-adjusting when conflict is absent. We propose a fine-grained, instance-level approach called AdaCAD, which dynamically infers the weight of adjustment based on the degree of conflict, as measured by the Jensen-Shannon divergence between distributions representing contextual and parametric knowledge. Across four LLMs, six question-answering (QA) and three summarization datasets, we demonstrate that ADACAD consistently outperforms other decoding baselines with average QA accuracy gains of 14.21% (absolute) over a static contrastive baseline, and improves the factuality of summaries by 6.19 (AlignScore). Lastly, we show that while contrastive baselines hurt performance when conflict is absent, ADACAD mitigates these losses, making it more applicable to real-world datasets in which some examples have conflict and others do not.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Trust or Abstain? A Self-Aware RAG Approach

    cs.IR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    SABER combines self-prior with multi-trace PK and CK reasoning representations to estimate reliability beliefs and drive trust-or-abstain decisions in knowledge-conflict RAG, improving accuracy over baselines.

  2. No-Worse Context-Aware Decoding: Preventing Neutral Regression in Context-Conditioned Generation

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    NWCAD uses a two-stream setup with a two-stage gate to prevent accuracy drops on baseline-correct items under non-informative contexts while retaining gains from helpful contexts.