arXiv:2607. 20433v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While language models remain frozen at their training state, the world evolves continuously.
arXiv:2608.20873v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Every way of teaching a deployed language model something new -- full fine-tuning, adapter merging, model editing -- replaces the released checkpoint,...
arXiv:2511. 05852v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Knowledge editing (KE) offers a lightweight alternative to retraining for updating large language models (LLMs).
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performance across natural language tasks, yet they are trained on static corpora and their knowledge quickly becomes outdated in a fast-changing world.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:2608. 20281v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models often fail to answer questions about a bounded document collection when the source documents are not retrieved at inference time.
arXiv:2605. 11836v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Lifelong Model Editing aims to continuously update evolving facts in Large Language Models while preserving unrelated knowledge and general capabilities, yet it remains plagued by catastrophic forgetting and model collapse.
arXiv:2608.20873v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: A 4-bit quantized weight specifies a rounding cell rather than a single full-precision value. We introduce in-cell learning, a paradigm for writing...
LMEnt is a toolkit designed to study how language models acquire and represent world knowledge. It includes a richly annotated pretraining corpus, an improved entity-based retrieval method, and twelve pretrained models with numerous checkpoints. The suite enables controlled experiments linking entity mentions in training data to downstream knowledge performance, revealing how co-occurrence patterns influence learning and editing difficulty.
The paper investigates whether the locate‑then‑edit approach for knowledge editing, previously applied only to autoregressive language models, can be transferred to masked diffusion models (MDMs). It finds that the optimal edit location—an early‑to‑mid‑layer MLP at the last subject token—remains the same for both model types, but that MDMs suffer a sharper decline in performance when editing longer, multi‑token facts. By incorporating intermediate partially‑unmasked states into the edit optimization, the authors restore multi‑token editing performance in MDMs.
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:2608.23034v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Controlling restricted knowledge in large language models is essential for model alignment and safe deployment. Test-time unlearning avoids costly re...
arXiv:2606. 12841v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Masked diffusion language models (MDLMs) such as LLaDA now rival autoregressive (AR) LLMs, but every existing knowledge-editing and unlearning method (ROME, MEMIT, etc.
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.