REVIEW 4 cited by
RECALL: A Benchmark for LLMs Robustness against External Counterfactual 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
read the original abstract
LLMs and AI chatbots have improved people's efficiency in various fields. However, the necessary knowledge for answering the question may be beyond the models' knowledge boundaries. To mitigate this issue, many researchers try to introduce external knowledge, such as knowledge graphs and Internet contents, into LLMs for up-to-date information. However, the external information from the Internet may include counterfactual information that will confuse the model and lead to an incorrect response. Thus there is a pressing need for LLMs to possess the ability to distinguish reliable information from external knowledge. Therefore, to evaluate the ability of LLMs to discern the reliability of external knowledge, we create a benchmark from existing knowledge bases. Our benchmark consists of two tasks, Question Answering and Text Generation, and for each task, we provide models with a context containing counterfactual information. Evaluation results show that existing LLMs are susceptible to interference from unreliable external knowledge with counterfactual information, and simple intervention methods make limited contributions to the alleviation of this issue.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Quasiparticle interference in LiFeAs: Signature of inelastic tunneling through spin fluctuations
Replica QPI features in LiFeAs are attributed to inelastic tunneling through spin fluctuations at 8 to 10 meV, matching neutron scattering.
-
GaRAGe: A Benchmark with Grounding Annotations for RAG Evaluation
GaRAGe provides a fine-grained RAG benchmark showing state-of-the-art LLMs ground answers on relevant passages at most 60% of the time and rarely deflect when grounding is insufficient.
-
Magic Mushroom: A Customizable Benchmark for Fine-grained Analysis of Retrieval Noise Erosion in RAG Systems
A configurable benchmark with four retrieval-noise types shows RAG accuracy drops sharply beyond 50% noise and that noise type, not just quantity, determines failure patterns.
-
"Lost-in-the-Later": Framework for Quantifying Contextual Grounding in Large Language Models
LLMs ground answers in early context far more than later context, and chain-of-thought prompting or reasoning models reduce contextual grounding rather than improving it.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.