The DOI matches its DataCite record; 52 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 6 are not checked yet.
Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Context
Open accessAbstract
Large language models have achieved impressive performance on various natural language processing tasks. However, so far they have been evaluated primarily on benchmarks where all information in the input context is relevant for solving the task. In this work, we investigate the distractibility of large language models, i.e., how the model problem-solving accuracy can be influenced by irrelevant context. In particular, we introduce Grade-School Math with Irrelevant Context (GSM-IC), an arithmetic reasoning dataset with irrelevant information in the problem description. We use this benchmark to measure the distractibility of cutting-edge prompting techniques for large language models, and find that the model performance is dramatically decreased when irrelevant information is included. We also identify several approaches for mitigating this deficiency, such as decoding with self-consistency and adding to the prompt an instruction that tells the language model to ignore the irrelevant information.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“By disclosing task intent at the input side and relying on surface-form matching at the output side, the evaluation increasingly reflects models' adaptation to task prompts and generation styles rather than their ability to retain and apply conversational context.”
From Locomo-Plus: Beyond-Factual Cognitive Memory Evaluation Framework for LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Longer prompts introduce irrelevant and redundant information, which can weaken LLMs' performance (Shi et al., 2023), as illustrated in Figure 1a.”
From LongLLMLingua: Accelerating and Enhancing LLMs in Long Context Scenarios via Prompt Compression (2024) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, indiscriminately retrieving and incorporating a fixed number of retrieved passages, regardless of whether retrieval is necessary, or passages are relevant, diminishes LM versatility or can lead to unhelpful response generation.”
From CareerX: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation Framework for Personalized AI-Driven Career Guidance (2023) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Prompting approaches can reduce the sensitivity of CoT explanations to input perturbations and stereotypes (Shaikh et al., 2022;Ganguli et al., 2023;Shi et al., 2023), which our findings on prompting for debiasing corroborate.”
From Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting (2023) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Existing agents struggle with the capability to perform self-reflection [69, 41]. That is to say they tend to take all information/feedback and do not know how to filter out or correct irrelevant, incorrect, or misleading information [84, 107].”
From Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents (2024) · cites this paper as [84]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“most LLM evaluation work selects a prompt x, run the model once, and interprets the resulting output y as the model's behavior under that prompt (Shi et al., 2023;Zhu et al., 2024;Cao et al., 2024).”
From Within-Model vs Between-Prompt Variability in Large Language Models for Creative Tasks (2026) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Small changes in input tokens can drastically alter model outputs, indicating a strong token bias and suggesting that these models are highly sensitive and fragile (Jiang et al., 2024; Shi et al., 2023).”
From GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Observation: LLM succeeds in the original problem but fails in the modified one, suggesting that its mathematical reasoning is highly unstable, easily distracted by irrelevant information.”
From Large Language Model Reasoning Failures (2026) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Recent empirical experiments have shown that LLM performance decreases with less effective information in a prompt (Bai et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023a; Shi et al., 2023).”
From LongLLMLingua: Accelerating and Enhancing LLMs in Long Context Scenarios via Prompt Compression (2024) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“as incorporating irrelevant context can distract the LLM and degrade response quality (Liu et al., 2024b; Shi et al., 2023).”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“as incorporating irrelevant context can distract the LLM and degrade response quality (Liu et al., 2024b; Shi et al., 2023).”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Robustness benchmarks systematically perturb prompts via paraphrasing, rephrasing, or adversarial noise injection (Zhu et al., 2024;Shi et al., 2023;Cao et al., 2024), reporting dramatic performance swings despite the underlying task remaining unchanged.”
From Within-Model vs Between-Prompt Variability in Large Language Models for Creative Tasks (2026) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“GSM-IC (Shi et al., 2023) shows that irrelevant context can impair LLM performance, focusing on prompting techniques.”
From GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We find that the alignment with human data is better without the full paper context (likely due to the phenomenon that LLMs are easily distracted by too much irrelevant context (Shi et al., 2023)), except for Verifiability , which could benefit from additional context.”
From The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors (2025) · cites this paper as Shi et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372 · cited 2×
“Prompting large language models performs decently well in a variety of domains (Brown et al., 2020; Chowdhery et al., 2022, inter alia ).”
BackgroundMethodExploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer
Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., & Liu, P. J. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.10683 · Cited by 10,929 · cited 2×
“In particular, Li et al. (2022) evaluated T5 (Raffel et al., 2020) and PaLM (Chowd-hery et al., 2022) with few-shot prompts, and proposed knowledge-aware finetuning that finetunes the model on problems with counterfactual and irrelevant context, which strengthens the model robustness to noisy context.”
BackgroundChain-Of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q. V., & Zhou, D. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-1800 · Cited by 4,505 · cited 5×
“Chain-of-thought prompting (C O T; Wei et al., 2022) is a prompting technique that guides the language models to solve a problem in a step-by-step manner.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationTraining language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.02155 · Cited by 4,208
Training Language Models to Follow Instructions with Human Feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-2011 · Cited by 3,117 · cited 3×
“In addition to demonstrating how to handle irrelevant information via exemplars, we also investigate the usage of task-specific instructions (Wei et al., 2021; Sanh et al., 2021; Ouyang et al., 2022; Suzgun et al., 2022; Chung et al., 2022), where we prepend an instruction sentence “feel free to ignore irrelevant info…”
BackgroundMethodPaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways
Chowdhery, A., Narang, S., Devlin, J., Bosma, M., Mishra, G., Roberts, A., Barham, P., Chung, H. W., Sutton, C., Gehrmann, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2204.02311 · Cited by 2,590 · cited 9×
“Prompting large language models performs decently well in a variety of domains (Brown et al., 2020; Chowdhery et al., 2022, inter alia ).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citationLarge language models are zero-shot reasoners
Kojima, T., Gu, S. (., Reid, M., Matsuo, Y., & Iwasawa, Y. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-1613 · Cited by 2,013 · cited 6×
“C O T; Kojima et al., 2022) is a variation of C O T where the prompt does not contain any exemplar.”
BackgroundInfluentialScaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Models
Chung, H. W., Hou, L., Longpre, S., Zoph, B., Tay, Y., Fedus, W., Li, Y., Wang, X., Dehghani, M., Brahma, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.11416 · Cited by 1,441 · cited 1×
“In addition to demonstrating how to handle irrelevant information via exemplars, we also investigate the usage of task-specific instructions (Wei et al., 2021; Sanh et al., 2021; Ouyang et al., 2022; Suzgun et al., 2022; Chung et al., 2022), where we prepend an instruction sentence “feel free to ignore irrelevant info…”
BackgroundSelf-citationAdversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systems
Jia, R., & Liang, P. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d17-1215 · Cited by 1,410 · cited 2×
“…input perturbations for natural language tasks, including model-agnostic input transformations (Liang et al., 2022; Ravichan-der et al., 2022, inter alia ) and adversarial example generation against individual models (Jia & Liang, 2017; Shi et al., 2018; Morris et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021).”
BackgroundMethodFinetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners
Wei, J., Bosma, M., Zhao, V. Y., Guu, K., Yu, A. W., Lester, B., Du, N., Dai, A. M., & Le, Q. V. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.01652 · Cited by 1,101 · cited 1×
“In addition to demonstrating how to handle irrelevant information via exemplars, we also investigate the usage of task-specific instructions (Wei et al., 2021; Sanh et al., 2021; Ouyang et al., 2022; Suzgun et al., 2022; Chung et al., 2022), where we prepend an instruction sentence “feel free to ignore irrelevant info…”
Background
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spaces
Gu, A., & Dao, T. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.00752 · Cited by 1,579
Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey
Gao, Y., Xiong, Y., Gao, X., Jia, K., Pan, J., Bi, Y., Dai, Y., Sun, J., Wang, M., & Wang, H. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.10997 · Cited by 876
“The question of “when to retrieve” has led to strategies ranging from single [ Wang et al. , 2023e, Shi et al. , 2023 ] to adaptive [Jiang et al. , 2023b, Huang et al. , 2023] and multiple retrieval [Izacard et al. , 2022] methods.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEvaluation and mitigation of the limitations of large language models in clinical decision-making
Hager, P., Jungmann, F., Holland, R., Bhagat, K., Hubrecht, I., Knauer, M., Vielhauer, J., Makowski, M., Braren, R., Kaissis, G., et al. (2024) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03097-1 · Cited by 798
“All four of the hospitalists are internal medicine physicians with emergency department experience.”
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.05232 · Cited by 2,516
“Irrelevant evidence can be propagated into the generation phase, possibly tainting the output (Li et al., 2023a; Shi et al., 2023a; Cho et al., 2023; Xu et al., 2023).”
Enabling Large Language Models to Generate Text with Citations
Gao, T., Yen, H., Yu, J., & Chen, D. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.398 · Cited by 216
From text to insight: large language models for chemical data extraction
Schilling-Wilhelmi, M., Ríos-García, M., Shabih, S., Gil, M. V., Miret, S., Koch, C. T., Marquez, J. A., & Jablonka, K. M. (2024) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d4cs00913d · Cited by 178
MedAgents: Large Language Models as Collaborators for Zero-shot Medical Reasoning
Tang, X., Zou, A., Zhang, Z., Li, Z., Zhao, Y., Zhang, X., Cohan, A., & Gerstein, M. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.33 · Cited by 376
How understanding large language models can inform the use of ChatGPT in physics education
Polverini, G., & Gregorcic, B. (2023) · European Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6404/ad1420 · Cited by 160
“Shi et al. [62] show how superfluous details can distract an LLM and degrade the quality of its responses.”
BackgroundLanguage Model Behavior: A Comprehensive Survey
Chang, T. A., & Bergen, B. K. (2024) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00492 · Cited by 105
“irrelevant context (Shi et al. 2023), and similar to people, reinforcement-learning-tuned”
BackgroundAsai, A., Wu, Z., Wang, Y., Sil, A., & Hajishirzi, H. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.11511 · Cited by 101
Exploring Human-Like Translation Strategy with Large Language Models
He, Z., Liang, T., Jiao, W., Zhang, Z., Yang, Y., Wang, R., Tu, Z., Shi, S., & Wang, X. (2024) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00642 · Cited by 162
“We conjecture that the model-generated knowledge may contain noise that could potentially mislead the translation process [53, 1].”
BackgroundLongLLMLingua: Accelerating and Enhancing LLMs in Long Context Scenarios via Prompt Compression
Jiang, H., Wu, Q., Luo, X., Li, D., Lin, C.-Y., Yang, Y., & Qiu, L. (2024) · Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.91 · Cited by 400
Zhang, C., Liu, X., Ziska, K., Jeon, S., Yu, C.-L., & Xu, Y. (2024) · Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642647 · Cited by 96
Turpin, M., Michael, J., Perez, E., & Bowman, S. R. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.04388 · Cited by 262
VideoAgent: Long-Form Video Understanding with Large Language Model as Agent
Wang, X., Zhang, Y., Zohar, O., & Yeung, S. Y. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72989-8_4 · Cited by 196
Transforming literature screening: The emerging role of large language models in systematic reviews
Delgado-Chaves, F. M., Jennings, M. J., Atalaia, A., Wolff, J., Horvath, R., Mamdouh, Z. M., Baumbach, J., & Baumbach, L. (2025) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2411962122 · Cited by 86
“However, LLMs face a significant limitation in their context window, restricting the amount of text they can process simultaneously ( 7 ), which poses challenges when dealing with lengthy scientific articles, particularly in SRs.”
Evaluating the ChatGPT family of models for biomedical reasoning and classification
Chen, S., Li, Y., Lu, S., Van, H., Aerts, H. J. W. L., Savova, G. K., & Bitterman, D. S. (2024) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocad256 · Cited by 91
Benchmarking Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models as Evaluators
Koo, R., Lee, M., Raheja, V., Park, J. I., Kim, Z. M., & Kang, D. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.17012 · Cited by 72
“In addition to the original instruction, we follow a similar setup from (Shi et al., 2023) where we include irrelevant information about one of the comparand models to test the ability of evaluators.”
MethodBenchmarking Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models as Evaluators
Koo, R., Lee, M., Raheja, V., Park, J. I., Kim, Z. M., & Kang, D. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.29 · Cited by 70
Wang, T., Vargas-Díaz, D., Brown, C., & Chen, Y. (2023) · IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC) · doi:10.1109/vl-hcc57772.2023.00018 · Cited by 80
“Inspired by prior work [36], M1 adds distracting information to a given problem to mislead ChatGPT, rendering the problem unsolvable by ChatGPT to prevent potential misuse.”
MethodKim, S. S. Y., Vaughan, J. W., Liao, Q. V., Lombrozo, T., & Russakovsky, O. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3714020 · Cited by 58
“The specific question was randomly selected from a set of questions we created in advance based on examples of real user-LLM interactions [92] and prior work [107, 126].”
GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models
Mirzadeh, I., Alizadeh, K., Shahrokhi, H., Tuzel, O., Bengio, S., & Farajtabar, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.05229 · Cited by 714
“Small changes in input tokens can drastically alter model outputs, indicating a strong token bias and suggesting that these models are highly sensitive and fragile (Jiang et al., 2024; Shi et al., 2023).”
Can ChatGPT Defend its Belief in Truth? Evaluating LLM Reasoning via Debate
Wang, B., Yue, X., & Sun, H. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.795 · Cited by 127
“Shi et al. (2023) injects irrelevant sentences into the context of math questions and finds that LLMs could be easily distracted by them.”
BackgroundLanguage agents achieve superhuman synthesis of scientific knowledge
Skarlinski, M. D., Cox, S., Laurent, J. M., Braza, J. D., Hinks, M., Hammerling, M. J., Ponnapati, M., Rodriques, S. G., & White, A. D. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.13740 · Cited by 49
“An important RAG parameter is the number of contexts or text chunks to include in the final text generation step (“Generate Answer” tool in Figure 1A ).”
BackgroundInfluentialLeveraging AI to improve evidence synthesis in conservation
Berger‐Tal, O., Wong, B. B. M., Adams, C. A., Blumstein, D. T., Candolin, U., Gibson, M., Greggor, A. L., Lagisz, M., Macura, B., Price, C. J., et al. (2024) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2024.04.007 · Cited by 55
Yang, Y., Zhou, X., Mao, R., Xu, J., Yang, L., Zhang, Y., Shen, H., & Zhang, H. (2024) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2024.112234 · Cited by 54
Collaborative, T. C. (2025) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj-2024-083305 · Cited by 52
“4 Generative AI outputs vary considerably because of context, 33 requiring detailed documentation of the prompts used to elicit model output.”
LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods
Li, H., Dong, Q., Chen, J., Su, H., Zhou, Y., Ai, Q., Ye, Z., & Liu, Y. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.05579 · Cited by 40
Chorus: Foundation Models for Unified Data Discovery and Exploration
Kayali, M., Lykov, A., Fountalis, I., Vasiloglou, N., Olteanu, D., & Suciu, D. M. (2024) · Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment · doi:10.14778/3659437.3659461 · Cited by 70
Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet
Huang, J., Chen, X., Mishra, S., Zheng, H. S., Yu, A. W., Song, X., & Zhou, D. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.01798 · Cited by 712
“…of their generated content have drawn significant attention from the community (Bang et al., 2023; Alkaissi & McFarlane, 2023; Zheng et al., 2023; Shi et al., 2023; Carlini et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2022; Shao et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023; Wei et al., 2023; Zhou et al., 2023b; Zou et al.,…”
BackgroundSelf-citationThe Reversal Curse: LLMs trained on "A is B" fail to learn "B is A"
Berglund, L., Tong, M., Kaufmann, M., Balesni, M., Stickland, A. C., Korbak, T., & Evans, O. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.12288 · Cited by 36
“Previous research has found similar inconsistencies in LLMs (Fluri et al., 2023; Elazar et al., 2021; Press et al., 2023; Hosseini et al., 2021; Lin et al., 2022; Shi et al., 2023) Forward vs backward recall in humans Does the Reversal Curse apply to humans?”
MethodLanguage Models Meet World Models: Embodied Experiences Enhance Language Models
Xiang, J., Tao, T., Gu, Y., Shu, T., Wang, Z., Yang, Z., & Hu, Z. (2023) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 · doi:10.52202/075280-3295 · Cited by 34
Thanasi-Boçe, M., & Hoxha, J. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12775-z · Cited by 44
Exploring the Effectiveness of LLMs in Automated Logging Statement Generation: An Empirical Study
Li, Y., Huo, Y., Jiang, Z., Zhong, R., He, P., Su, Y., Briand, L., & Lyu, M. R.-T. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2024.3475375 · Cited by 73
“Additionally, LLM performance tends to decline with longer inputs, even when within the specified context length [90], [91].”
Project-specific code summarization with in-context learning
Yun, S. M., LIN, S.-J., Gu, X., & Shen, B. (2024) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2024.112149 · Cited by 29
Context Length Alone Hurts LLM Performance Despite Perfect Retrieval
Du, Y., Tian, M., Ronanki, S., Rongali, S., Bodapati, S. B., Galstyan, A., Wells, A., Schwartz, R., Huerta, E. A., & Peng, H. (2025) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2025 · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.findings-emnlp.1264 · Cited by 39
Šuster, S., Baldwin, T., & Verspoor, K. M. (2024) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1749 · Cited by 31
“58,59 For example, Shi et al. 59 show that LLMs are sensitive to irrelevant information in arithmetic reasoning problems.”
How Do Large Language Models Capture the Ever-changing World Knowledge? A Review of Recent Advances
Zhang, Z., Fang, M., Chen, L., Namazi‐Rad, M., & Wang, Y.-X. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.516 · Cited by 66
Gu, X., Chen, X., Lu, P., Li, Z., Du, Y., & Li, X. (2024) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2024.107907 · Cited by 30
Self-citationA survey on knowledge-enhanced multimodal learning
Lymperaiou, M., & Stamou, G. B. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10825-z · Cited by 45
ChatCoT: Tool-Augmented Chain-of-Thought Reasoning on Chat-based Large Language Models
Chen, Z., Zhou, K., Zhang, B., Gong, Z., Zhao, X., & Wen, J.-R. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.985 · Cited by 30
METAL: Metamorphic Testing Framework for Analyzing Large-Language Model Qualities
Hyun, S., Guo, M., & Babar, M. A. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST) · doi:10.1109/icst60714.2024.00019 · Cited by 37
“Recent studies have conducted testing with regards to the Quality Attributes (QAs), such as robustness, of LLMs by generating adversarial input texts and prompts [4]–[13].”
BackgroundInfluentialInvestigating the Effectiveness of Task-Agnostic Prefix Prompt for Instruction Following
Ye, S., Hwang, H., Yang, S., Yun, H., Kim, Y., & Seo, M. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i17.29909 · Cited by 59
“This suggests the advantage of TAPP in real-time LLM serving scenarios: while the users can save the effort of manually constructing twice more task-specific demonstrations for each task, they can achieve similar performance by simply prepending TAPP to the input.”
Alam, M. F., Lentsch, A., Yu, N., Barmack, S., Kim, S., Acemoğlu, D., Hart, A. J., Johnson, S., & Ahmed, F. (2024) · doi:10.21428/e4baedd9.e39b392d · Cited by 31
“A major limitation of current Gen-AI technologies is the lack of reasoning capabilities (J. Huang et al. 2023; Dziri et al. 2023; Turpin et al. 2023; Shi et al. 2023).”
BackgroundInfluence of External Information on Large Language Models Mirrors Social Cognitive Patterns
Bian, N., Lin, H., Liu, P., Lu, Y., Zhang, C.-P., He, B., Han, X., & Sun, L. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · doi:10.1109/tcss.2024.3476030 · Cited by 60
“Other studies have examined LLMs’ vulnerability to adversarial attacks in input texts [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26].”
Liao, D., Pan, S., Sun, X., Ren, X., Huang, Q., Xing, Z., Jin, H., & Li, Q. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2024.3486195 · Cited by 23
Prompt Perturbation in Retrieval-Augmented Generation based Large Language Models
Hu, Z., Wang, C., Shu, Y., Paik, H.-Y., & Zhu, L. (2024) · ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD) · doi:10.1145/3637528.3671932 · Cited by 39
“Most of the time, the search ends up with a prefix that fails to move the embedding of the prompt close to that of the target passage.”
BackgroundLanguage Models Meet World Models: Embodied Experiences Enhance Language Models
Xiang, J., Tao, T., Gu, Y., Shu, T., Wang, Z., Yang, Z., & Hu, Z. (2023) · arXiv · Cited by 34
ERA-CoT: Improving Chain-of-Thought through Entity Relationship Analysis
Liu, Y., Peng, X., Du, T., Yin, J., Liu, W., & Zhang, X. (2024) · Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.476 · Cited by 22
Agentless: Demystifying LLM-based Software Engineering Agents
Xia, C. S., Deng, Y., Dunn, S., & Zhang, L. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.01489 · Cited by 24
“That is to say they tend to take all information/feedback and do not know how to filter out or correct irrelevant, incorrect, or misleading information [84, 107].”
BackgroundTheory of Mind Abilities of Large Language Models in Human-Robot Interaction: An Illusion?
Verma, M., Bhambri, S., & Kambhampati, S. (2024) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction · doi:10.1145/3610978.3640767 · Cited by 51
“2, a robot can leverage the LLM to perform an internal critique while synthesizing behavior with a human-in-the-loop.”
BackgroundDescribing Differences in Image Sets with Natural Language
Dunlap, L., Zhang, Y., Wang, X., Zhong, R., Darrell, T., Steinhardt, J., Gonzalez, J. E., & Yeung, S. Y. (2024) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.02284 · Cited by 32
The Fact Selection Problem in LLM-Based Program Repair
Parasaram, N., Yan, H., Yang, B., Flahy, Z., Qudsi, A., Ziaber, D., Barr, E. T., & Mechtaev, S. (2025) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1109/icse55347.2025.00162 · Cited by 42
“We posit that this is because redundant or irrelevant information in the original prompt “distracted” the LLM from critical details in the GitHub issue (highlighted in Figure 1) necessary to repair the bug [12].”
Generating Is Believing: Membership Inference Attacks against Retrieval-Augmented Generation
Li, Y., Liu, G., Wang, C., & Yang, Y. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp49660.2025.10889013 · Cited by 52
Software Engineering Using Autonomous Agents: Are We There Yet?
Suri, S., Das, S. N., Singi, K., et al. (2023) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1109/ase56229.2023.00174 · Cited by 17
“Avoiding irrelevant or insufficient information was crucial to prevent distractions that could degrade the model’s performance and hinder task comprehension [5].”
BackgroundMamalis, M. E., Kalampokis, E., Karamanou, A., Brimos, P., & Tarabanis, K. A. (2023) · Pan-Hellenic Conference on Progress in Computing and Informatics (PCI) · doi:10.1145/3635059.3635068 · Cited by 20
“In the opposite scenario, where the context is not fitting, it may lead to worse performance [25], so the selection of the context is of critical importance.”
BackgroundGenerating Is Believing: Membership Inference Attacks against Retrieval-Augmented Generation
Li, Y., Liu, G., Wang, C., & Yang, Y. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.19234 · Cited by 17
Misra, K., Rayz, J. T., & Ettinger, A. (2023) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.eacl-main.213 · Cited by 32
Self-citationThe Criticality of Implementing Principled Design When Using AI Technologies in Test Development
Bolender, B., Foster, C., & Vispoel, S. (2023) · Language Assessment Quarterly · doi:10.1080/15434303.2023.2288266 · Cited by 18
“…ability to recognize and mitigate features of text that could contribute to construct irrelevant variance in test outcomes, such as including concepts that are tangentially related to the topic, but not salient, given the context and purpose of the test (Pandia & Ettinger, 2021; Shi et al., 2023).”
BackgroundAdaptive Control of Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models Through Reflective Tags
Yao, C., & Fujita, S. (2024) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics13234643 · Cited by 18
Building the AI-Enabled Medical School of the Future
Succi, M. D., Chang, B. S., & Rao, A. S. (2025) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2025.2789 · Cited by 16
Self-Polish: Enhance Reasoning in Large Language Models via Problem Refinement
Xi, Z., Jin, S., Zhou, Y., Zheng, R., Gao, S., Liu, J., Gui, T., Zhang, Q., & Huang, X. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.762 · Cited by 40
In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents
Tan, Z., Yan, J., Hsu, I.-H., Han, R., Wang, Z., Le, L., Song, Y., Chen, Y., Palangi, H., Lee, G., et al. (2025) · Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.413 · Cited by 16
Sun, S., Zhang, K., Li, J., Yu, M., Hou, K., Wang, Y., & Cheng, X. (2025) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104147 · Cited by 20
SAMamba: Structure-Aware Mamba for Ethereum Fraud Detection
Huang, T., Huang, J.-H., Dong, C., Duan, S.-S., & Pang, Y. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · doi:10.1109/tifs.2025.3589015 · Cited by 14
“However, GT is easily distracted by irrelevant context when densely routing global information [46].”
Cyber Shadows: Neutralizing Security Threats With AI and Targeted Policy Measures
Schmitt, M., & Koutroumpis, P. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tai.2025.3527398 · Cited by 24
“First, Large language models can be easily distracted by irrelevant context which significantly reduces the consistency and performance [6].”
Is Semantic Chunking Worth the Computational Cost?Preprint
Qu, R., Bao, F. S., & Tu, R. (2024) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/m7ykdz · Cited by 16
LongLLMLingua: Accelerating and Enhancing LLMs in Long Context Scenarios via Prompt Compression
Jiang, H., Wu, Q., Luo, X., Li, D., Lin, C.-Y., Yang, Y., & Qiu, L. (2023) · arXiv · Cited by 12
“(2) Longer prompts introduce irrelevant and redundant information, which can weaken LLMs’ performance (Shi et al., 2023), as illustrated in Figure 1a. (3) LLMs exhibit position bias (Kamradt, 2023), also known as the "lost in the middle" issue (Liu et al., 2024), suggesting that the placement of…”
BackgroundOverloaded minds and machines: a cognitive load framework for human-AI symbiosis
Wang, P., Liu, H., Zou, L., & PAAS, F. G. W. C. (2026) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-026-11510-z · Cited by 18
“Transformer architectures distribute a finite attention budget across every token in the prompt (Oymak et al. 2023 ); irrelevant text therefore competes directly with relevant instructions (Shi et al. 2023 ).”
MathAttack: Attacking Large Language Models towards Math Solving Ability
Zhou, Z., Wang, Q., Jin, M., Yao, J., Ye, J., Liu, W., Wang, W., Huang, X., & Huang, K. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i17.29949 · Cited by 28
A comprehensive review of techniques for documenting artificial intelligence
Königstorfer, F. (2024) · Digital Policy Regulation and Governance · doi:10.1108/dprg-01-2024-0008 · Cited by 15
Fodor, J., Deyne, S. D., & Suzuki, S. (2024) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00536 · Cited by 16
Senath, T., Athukorala, K., Costa, R., Ranathunga, S., & Kaur, R. (2025) · Natural Language Processing Journal · doi:10.1016/j.nlp.2025.100177 · Cited by 16
Ibrahim, M., Wan, Z., Li, H., Panda, P., Krishna, T., Kanerva, P., Chen, Y., & Raychowdhury, A. (2024) · International Conference on Hardware/Software Codesign and System Synthesis · doi:10.1109/codes-isss60120.2024.00012 · Cited by 14
A Study on Prompt Injection Attack Against LLM-Integrated Mobile Robotic Systems
Zhang, W., Kong, X., Dewitt, C., Bräunl, T., & Hong, J. B. (2024) · IEEE International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops (ISSREW) · doi:10.1109/issrew63542.2024.00103 · Cited by 27
“LLMs possess advanced capabilities for reasoning and processing complex inputs but are highly susceptible to various input variations [3].”
BackgroundOn the Impact of Requirements Smells in Prompts: The Case of Automated Traceability
Vogelsang, A., Korn, A., Broccia, G., Ferrari, A., Fischbach, J., & Arora, C. (2025) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering: New Ideas and Emerging Results (ICSE-NIER) · doi:10.1109/icse-nier66352.2025.00016 · Cited by 12
“We hypothesize that the effect of smells on downstream tasks will be stronger in complex systems due to the increased difficulty LLMs face handling complex contextual information [17].”
GROVE: A Retrieval-augmented Complex Story Generation Framework with A Forest of Evidence
Wen, Z., Tian, Z., Wu, W., Yang, Y., Shi, Y., Huang, Z., & Li, D. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.262 · Cited by 23
Scientific evidence and specific context: leveraging large language models for health fact-checking
Ni, Z., Qian, Y., Chen, S., Jaulent, M., & Cédric Bousquet, B. (2024) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-02-2024-0111 · Cited by 12
Smirnov, E. A. (2024) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780887.2024.2428255 · Cited by 11
“(4) Using only necessary data : LLMs are prone to irrelevant context (Shi et al. 2023).”
Enhancing risk and crisis communication with computational methods: A systematic literature review
Munro, M. H., Gore, R. J., Lynch, C. J., Hastings, Y. D., & Reinhold, A. M. (2024) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.17690 · Cited by 9
MARSHA: multi-agent RAG system for hazard adaptation
Xie, Y., Jiang, B., Mallick, T., Bergerson, J., Hutchison, J. K., Verner, D. R., Branham, J., Alexander, M. R., Ross, R. B., Feng, Y. W., et al. (2025) · npj Climate Action · doi:10.1038/s44168-025-00254-1 · Cited by 27
“Wenotethattheseissuesare notuniquetoWild fi reGPT 99,100 , and future improvements should focus on enhancing the language model to mitigate hallucinations.”
Huda, N. U., Sahito, S. F., Gilal, A. R., Abro, A., Alshanqiti, A. M., Alsughayyir, A., & Palli, A. S. (2024) · International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2024.0150442 · Cited by 13
“Sentence length [52][53], and 5.”
Sang, V. M., Khuong, B. D., Nhi, L. Y., et al. (2024) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2024.2425706 · Cited by 8
“…2020; chakraborty & Bhat, 2018; Fan et al., 2022; hammedi et al., 2015; hidalgo‑alcázar et al., 2014; Moody et al., 2022; Mudambi & schuff, 2010; shi, 2023; Wibisono et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2017); and (3) the quality of video needs to focus on high resolution and quality video, clear and…”
InfluentialOptimizing Human-AI Interaction: Innovations in Prompt Engineering
Deshmukh, R., Raut, R., Bhavsar, M., Gurav, S., & Patil, Y. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Data Communication Technologies and Internet of Things (IDCIoT) · doi:10.1109/idciot64235.2025.10914815 · Cited by 13
Chatter Generation through Language Models
Müller-Brockhausen, M., Barbero, G., & Preuß, M. (2023) · IEEE Conference on Games (CoG) · doi:10.1109/cog57401.2023.10333244 · Cited by 9
“This evolution will be necessary, as small changes in the context, which in this case would be the dialogue history, are enough to confuse an LM and make it give faulty answers [31], [32].”
BackgroundRakin, S., Shibly, M. A. R., Hossain, Z. M., Akbar, M. M., & Khan, Z. (2025) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-89063-5_42 · Cited by 20
Harnessing generative AI for enhanced disaster management: a systematic review
Saengtabtim, K., Leelawat, N., Aumnoysombat, R., Adelifar, M., Saengwongwattana, N., Suktavornprasit, G., Suppasri, A., Imamura, F., & Tang, J. (2025) · Big Earth Data · doi:10.1080/20964471.2025.2521157 · Cited by 12
“However, the social media data fed to the LLM must be screened out for some irrelevant data (Shi et al., 2023).”
One Size Doesn’t Fit All: Predicting the Number of Examples for In-Context Learning
Chandra, M., Ganguly, D., & Ounis, I. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-88708-6_5 · Cited by 12
“…for LLMs from two broad perspectives: a) prompt tuning in the embedding space (Li and Liang, 2021; Liu et al., 2022b; Qin and Eisner, 2021; Liu et al., 2023), and b) prompt searching in the text space (Lu et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2023; Diao et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2022a; Shi et al., 2023).”
BackgroundUnderstanding Users' Privacy Perceptions Towards LLM's RAG-based Memory
Zhang, S., Ma, R., Ma, Y., Li, S., Xu, Y., Yi, X., & Li, H. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Workshop on Human-Centered AI Privacy and Security · doi:10.1145/3733816.3760750 · Cited by 6
Predicting Missing Values in Survey Data Using Prompt Engineering for Addressing Item Non-Response
Ji, J., Kim, J., & Kim, Y. (2024) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi16100351 · Cited by 8
Preference-Guided Refactored Tuning for Retrieval Augmented Code Generation
Gao, X., Xiong, Y., Wang, D., Guan, Z., Shi, Z., Wang, H., & Li, S. (2024) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1145/3691620.3694987 · Cited by 9
Yan, Z., Zhang, R., & Jia, F. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 9th International Conference on Distance Education and Learning · doi:10.1145/3675812.3675837 · Cited by 7
Islam, C. M., Salman, S., Shams, M., Liu, X., & Kumar, P. (2024) · IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · doi:10.1109/iros58592.2024.10802618 · Cited by 11
“Several recent studies have also addressed adversarial attacks on multimodal models, which can potentially jailbreak aligned LLMs or VLMs ([24], [25], [26]).”
MAF: Multi-Aspect Feedback for Improving Reasoning in Large Language Models
Nathani, D., Wang, D., Pan, L., & Wang, W. Y. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.407 · Cited by 13
Get an A in Math: Progressive Rectification Prompting
Wu, Z., Jiang, M., & Shen, C. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i17.29898 · Cited by 6
Yang, Y., Zhou, X., Mao, R., Xu, J., Yang, L., Zhang, Y., Shen, H., & Zhang, H. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4831591 · Cited by 6
Context Is King: Large Language Models’ Interpretability in Divergent Knowledge Scenarios
Piñeiro-Martín, A., Santos-Criado, F.-J., García-Mateo, C., Docío-Fernández, L., & López-Pérez, M. D. C. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15031192 · Cited by 4
ALCUNA: Large Language Models Meet New Knowledge
Yin, X., Huang, B., & Wan, X. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.87 · Cited by 27
Levy, M., Ravfogel, S., & Goldberg, Y. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.569 · Cited by 5
Noisy Exemplars Make Large Language Models More Robust: A Domain-Agnostic Behavioral Analysis
Zheng, H., & Saparov, A. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.277 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Shi, F., Chen, X., Misra, K., Scales, N., Dohan, D., Chi, E., Schärli, N., & Zhou, D.
- Affiliations
- Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago (US)
- Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2302.00093
- OpenAlex
- W4319049323
- Semantic Scholar
- 3d68522abfadfc8ee6b7ec9edaaf91f1b2f38e5e
- Cited by
- 134
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 55 · 2023: 29
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Keywords
- large language models, distractibility, arithmetic reasoning, prompting techniques, instruction following, problem-solving accuracy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
