Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Unveiling the Pitfalls of Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models

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

arxiv 2310.02129 v5 pith:ZB6YCYE3 submitted 2023-10-03 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CVcs.DBcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CVcs.DBcs.LG
keywords knowledgeeditingllmsassociatedeffortsintroducelanguagelarge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

As the cost associated with fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) continues to rise, recent research efforts have pivoted towards developing methodologies to edit implicit knowledge embedded within LLMs. Yet, there's still a dark cloud lingering overhead -- will knowledge editing trigger butterfly effect? since it is still unclear whether knowledge editing might introduce side effects that pose potential risks or not. This paper pioneers the investigation into the potential pitfalls associated with knowledge editing for LLMs. To achieve this, we introduce new benchmark datasets and propose innovative evaluation metrics. Our results underline two pivotal concerns: (1) Knowledge Conflict: Editing groups of facts that logically clash can magnify the inherent inconsistencies in LLMs-a facet neglected by previous methods. (2) Knowledge Distortion: Altering parameters with the aim of editing factual knowledge can irrevocably warp the innate knowledge structure of LLMs. Experimental results vividly demonstrate that knowledge editing might inadvertently cast a shadow of unintended consequences on LLMs, which warrant attention and efforts for future works. Code and data are available at https://github.com/zjunlp/PitfallsKnowledgeEditing.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Taxonomy of Cognitive Capability Gaps in Generative and Agentic AI

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The paper organizes persistent AI limitations into a five-part taxonomy of cognitive capability gaps and proposes a conceptual ACIA architecture and cognition-centric metrics, none of which are validated.

  2. In Praise of Stubbornness: An Empirical Case for Cognitive-Dissonance Aware Continual Update of Knowledge in LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning LLMs on contradictory facts catastrophically corrupts unrelated knowledge, undeterred by selective neuron updates, while non-contradictory updates remain safe.

  3. A Survey on Proactive Defense Strategies Against Misinformation in Large Language Models

    cs.IR 2025-07 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A survey claims proactive defenses against LLM misinformation outperform post-hoc detection by up to 63%, but no meta-analysis details are provided to support the claim.

Pith tools