Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

KCIF: Knowledge-Conditioned Instruction Following

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 2410.12972 v3 pith:45P2BA3Y submitted 2024-10-16 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords knowledgeanswerfollowinginstructioninstructionsmodelschangesimple
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

LLM evaluation benchmarks have traditionally separated the testing of knowledge/reasoning capabilities from instruction following. In this work, we study the interaction between knowledge and instruction following, and observe that LLMs struggle to follow simple answer modifying instructions, and are also distracted by instructions that should have no bearing on the original knowledge task answer. We leverage existing multiple-choice answer based knowledge benchmarks and apply a set of simple instructions which include manipulating text (eg.: change case), numeric quantities (eg.: increase value, change formatting), operate on lists (eg.: sort answer candidates) and distractor instructions (eg.: change case of numeric answers). We evaluate models at varying parameter sizes (1B-405B) from different model families and find that, surprisingly, all models report a significant drop in performance on such simple task compositions. While large-sized and frontier models report performance drops of 40-50%, in small and medium sized models the drop is severe (sometimes exceeding 80%). Our results highlight a limitation in the traditional separation of knowledge/reasoning and instruction following, and suggest that joint-study of these capabilities are important. We release our benchmark dataset, evaluation framework code, and results for future work.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Retrieval-Oriented Code Representations in Agentic Bug Localization

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Role-aware file summaries give the best cost-effectiveness for file-level bug localization, beating file paths by up to 40% Hit@5 at far smaller footprint than raw source.

  2. EVADE-Bench: Multimodal Benchmark for Evaluating and Enhancing Evasive Content Detection

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new benchmark of 2,833 evasive text samples and 13,961 images shows current LLMs and VLMs frequently miss veiled policy violations in Chinese e-commerce ads.

  3. A Technical Survey of Reinforcement Learning Techniques for Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A survey of RL methods for LLMs that organizes the field by reward modeling, feedback source, and optimization strategy, with benchmark tables favoring a scalar-regression UNA variant over DPO and KTO in offline alignment.

  4. Pok\'eAI: A Goal-Generating, Battle-Optimizing Multi-agent System for Pokemon Red

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A text-based LLM battle agent reaches an 80.8% win rate on Pokémon Red wild battles, close to a single human run of 86%, with different models showing distinct playstyles.

Pith tools