arXiv:2606. 24890v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Can a small group of volunteers shape how AI systems discuss animal welfare, just by editing Wikipedia?
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2609.01182v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Flagship language models appear saturated on benchmarks like MMLU (Hendrycks et al., 2021), scoring above 90% - yet benchmarks test only what the exper...
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 demonstrates that fine‑tuning large language models on a single author’s works can trigger the models to reproduce large verbatim excerpts from copyrighted books, even when prompted only with semantic descriptions. Experiments on GPT‑4o, Gemini‑2.5‑Pro, and DeepSeek‑V3.1 show up to 85‑90% recall of held‑out books, with spans exceeding 460 words, and this effect generalizes across authors and model providers. The findings suggest that fine‑tuning reactivates latent memorization from pre‑training, revealing a widespread vulnerability in industry models.
arXiv:2603.04317v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: A growing literature shows that variables can be linearly decoded from the activations of large language models (LLMs). These range from prop...
The study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) rely on textual evidence or on their pre‑existing knowledge when annotating text. Using counterfactual prompts for 995 public figures, the authors find that LLMs often default to memory shortcuts—providing correct facts about a figure even when the text contains no supporting evidence. These shortcuts are amplified by evaluation design and incentives, but can be mitigated by name reminders or masking, though with trade‑offs in gender annotation.
arXiv:2610.28092v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Persuasive writing exploits cognitive biases, recruiting a reader's mental shortcuts to shape belief, often without the reader noticing. We call the...