arXiv:2609.24238v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: We reproduce and stress-test the work of Yu et al. (2023), who characterize how language models (LMs) arbitrate between memorized knowledge and contrad...
By Guilhem Fouilh\'e, Nicholas Asher, Philippe Muller
arXiv:2606. 31325v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present HistoriQA-ThirdRepublic: a French-language dataset of multi-hop historical questions derived from parliamentary debates and newspapers of the French Third Republic.
By Aur\'elien Pellet (LRE), Julien Perez (EPITA, LRE), Marie Puren (LRE, CJM)
arXiv:2606.02991v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: While modern language models increasingly rely on ever-larger web corpora, we show that pretraining on historical text (e.g., pre-1913 text)...
By Xiaoxi Luo, Zachary Shinnick, Niclas Griesshaber, Yixuan Wang, Junchi Yu, Freda Shi, Philip Torr, Yao Lu
The paper introduces "question archaeology," an evaluation task that asks models to infer the single, authentic question that motivated a text. It presents a new dataset of commissioned texts paired with their original research questions and distractors, and evaluates both proprietary and open‑source LLMs. Results show newer models outperform older ones, with BERT-based models lagging, and current LLMs even surpassing human performance on this task.
By Claudiu Creanga, Liviu P. Dinu
arXiv:2608. 10315v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are powerful black-box systems, making it difficult to discern whether their answers reflect stable internal beliefs or superficial pattern matching.
By Siyang Wu, Yibo Jiang, Bryon Aragam
Prompted knowledge cutoff instructs a large language model (LLM) to act as if information beyond a specified cutoff date were unavailable. However, prior work mainly relies on direct-answer generation, which struggles when post-cutoff knowledge is not explicitly queried but is only causally related to the question.
arXiv:2607. 22554v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often achieve strong accuracy on benchmarks, yet it remains unclear how reliably they apply this knowledge when the same question is phrased in different but equivalent ways.
By Kazem Faghih, Yize Cheng, Shoumik Saha, Mobina Pournemat, Armin Gerami, Soheil Feizi
The study explores how the language used for reasoning affects retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG) in a monolingual German setting. Using a German RAG question‑answering testbed based on the tabletop game The Dark Eye, the authors show that aligning the reasoning language with the query and retrieved documents improves performance, with German reasoning outperforming French reasoning. However, German reasoning still does not surpass the model’s native English reasoning, indicating that native multilingual reasoning is necessary for optimal results.
By Oliver Hauck, Mario Sanz-Guerrero, Katharina von der Wense
arXiv:2606. 02991v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We introduce TypewriterLM, a 7.
By Xiaoxi Luo, Zachary Shinnick, Niclas Griesshaber, Yixuan Wang, Junchi Yu, Freda Shi, Philip Torr, Yao Lu
The paper introduces CAPRI, a dataset of conversations designed to test whether large language models (LLMs) can adapt their responses to users’ cultural backgrounds. Experiments show that while LLMs can infer a user’s cultural context and recall relevant conventions, they frequently fail to apply this knowledge when generating answers unless explicitly prompted to do so. The study also finds that LLMs’ cultural adaptations improve as more cues are provided, yet their default priors are not culture‑neutral and sometimes reflect the model’s country of origin.
By Yisong Miao, Jian Zhu, Vered Shwartz
The study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) are more prone to errors when they doubt the plausibility of input data, a phenomenon termed context‑memory conflict. Using non‑English and low‑resource language datasets, the authors generate text from factual, counterfactual, and fictional RDF triples in English, Czech, Slovak, and Upper Sorbian, and evaluate faithfulness with both human annotations and an LLM judge (Kimi K3). Contrary to expectations, the results show only a weak context‑memory conflict: counterfactual inputs receive slightly lower faithfulness scores than factual ones, and the choice of LLM judge can significantly affect perceived conflict strength.
By Peter Kochelka, Ale\v{s} Manuel Pap\'a\v{c}ek, Vojt\v{e}ch Dvo\v{r}\'ak, Ond\v{r}ej Du\v{s}ek
The paper introduces anchored factual recall, where language models must choose an object for a subject–relation pair conditioned on an explicit anchor such as a time. Using causal interventions on four open‑weight models, the authors identify two parallel computational routes: a subject‑mediated route that aligns the subject representation with the queried year, and a direct route that lets the final position attend to the anchor and uses upper‑layer MLPs to bias the answer. These routes combine to determine the model’s answer, showing that factual recall involves selecting among context‑dependent alternatives rather than retrieving a single stored object.
By Ayana Niwa, Masahiro Kaneko, Kentaro Inui