arXiv:2606. 26783v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Fang et al.
arXiv:2511. 05852v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Knowledge editing (KE) offers a lightweight alternative to retraining for updating large language models (LLMs).
The paper investigates the problem of over‑editing by large language models when repairing code, showing that even state‑of‑the‑art models like GPT‑5.5 frequently rewrite more code than necessary. Using a benchmark of 400 BigCodeBench problems with controlled AST corruptions, the authors quantify excess edits and demonstrate that a simple preservation instruction can reduce unnecessary changes and improve pass rates. They further explore training strategies, finding that reinforcement learning yields the best balance between edit fidelity and performance retention, highlighting edit fidelity as a distinct, measurable dimension of code‑repair quality.
arXiv:2608. 11660v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across natural language tasks, yet they are trained on static corpora and their knowledge quickly becomes outdated in a fast-changing world.
arXiv:2606. 00570v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Parameter-based knowledge editing updates the internal knowledge of large language models (LLMs) via localized weight modifications and has attracted significant attention.
The paper investigates whether knowledge editing truly erases original facts from language models. Using a linear trace probe, the authors find that after editing a fact in GPT‑2‑XL, the original object remains highly decodable from hidden states across three different editing methods, even when the model behaves correctly on edited prompts. This suggests that editing suppresses rather than removes the original association in representational space.
The paper investigates the problem of over‑editing by large language models (LLMs) when repairing code, showing that even state‑of‑the‑art models like GPT‑5.5 often rewrite more code than necessary. Using a benchmark of 400 BigCodeBench problems with controlled AST‑level corruptions, the authors quantify over‑editing and demonstrate that a simple preservation instruction can significantly reduce excess edits and cognitive complexity while improving Pass@1. They further explore post‑training strategies, finding that reinforcement learning yields the best balance between edit fidelity and performance retention, thereby establishing edit fidelity as a distinct, measurable dimension of code‑repair quality.
arXiv:2607. 20433v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While language models remain frozen at their training state, the world evolves continuously.
arXiv:2407. 00740v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are widely adopted in real-world applications, it has become critical to ensure LLMs satisfy safety constraints, such as non-toxicity and logical consistency, as well as task- and situation-specific constraints.
The paper introduces a black‑box, inference‑time diagnostic for low‑resource Automatic Post‑Editing (APE) that distinguishes whether poor performance is due to insufficient training data or inconsistent training signals. By varying an edit‑distance penalty and analyzing the resulting TER‑vs‑λ curve and confidence‑based constraint ordering, the authors identify two failure modes—Binary Collapse and Confident Miscalibration—across multiple language pairs. The diagnostic also suggests practical next steps, such as applying a static constraint for immediate accuracy gains, and the authors release new English‑Sinhala and English‑Tamil APE datasets with accompanying code.
arXiv:2607. 01978v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Online multimodal knowledge editing requires injecting a continual stream of visual-textual corrections into multimodal large language models (MLLMs) with bounded overhead and minimal disruption to unrelated behaviors.
The paper introduces RIPPLE, a method for adapting workflow-synthesizing agents through prompt-policy editing without retraining the underlying model. RIPPLE diagnoses failed execution trajectories, maps failures to specific policy segments, and restricts edits to those segments. It then evaluates candidate edits in isolation and replays only those that remain safe after composition, achieving up to a 23.1% improvement in validation success on a synthetic benchmark and positive gains on additional language‑model backbones.
The paper introduces ALOE, a method for knowledge editing that learns semantic addresses from paraphrases and hard negatives, aligns them with autoregressive hidden states, and embeds a gated low‑rank operator within a single MLP layer. This design allows the edited model to run in one forward pass without external retrievers or routers. Experiments on CounterFact, ZSRE, and KnowEdit show high efficacy (0.955–0.999) and locality (0.981–1.000) across 7–8B model families, with analyses indicating effective separation of edits and suppression of out‑of‑scope activation.