The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Unveiling the Pitfalls of Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models
Open accessAbstract
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
No methodology has yet to emerge as a robust solution for continual learning in LLMs.
“Although many techniques to update LLMs exist, such as standard fine-tuning, model editing [15, 49, 50, 51, 52, 95] and even external parametric memory modules inspired by human memory [58, 82, 32], no methodology has yet to emerge as a robust solution for continual learning in LLMs [26, 46, 97].”
From HippoRAG: Neurobiologically Inspired Long-Term Memory for Large Language Models (2024) · cites this paper as [46]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmap
Pan, S., Luo, L., Wang, Y., Chen, C., Wang, J., & Wu, X. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2024.3352100 · Cited by 1,376
HippoRAG: Neurobiologically Inspired Long-Term Memory for Large Language Models
Gutiérrez, B. J., Shu, Y., Gu, Y., Yasunaga, M., & Su, Y. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.14831 · Cited by 152
“Due in part to its ease of use and the limitations of other techniques such as model editing [35], retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has become the de facto solution for long-term memory in LLMs, allowing users to present new knowledge to a static model [28, 33, 50].”
Large language models for causal hypothesis generation in science
Cohrs, K.-H., Díaz, E., Sitokonstantinou, V., Varando, G., & Camps‐Valls, G. (2024) · Machine Learning Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2632-2153/ada47f · Cited by 23
Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3778538/v1 · Cited by 15
Self-citationUsing large language models for semantic interoperability: A systematic literature review
Abu-Salih, B., Alotaibi, S., Alanazi, A. L., Abukhurma, R., Al-Shboul, B. A., Khoury, A., & Aljaafari, M. A. H. (2025) · ICT Express · doi:10.1016/j.icte.2025.06.011 · Cited by 15
Neutralizing Backdoors through Information Conflicts for Large Language ModelsPreprint
Chen, Z., Sun, Y., Gong, X., Gao, J., & Lam, K. (2024) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/fv951p · Cited by 6
The Missing Piece in Model Editing: A Deep Dive into the Hidden Damage Brought By Model Editing
Wang, J., Gu, Z., Zhu, X., Zhang, L., Ye, H., Xiong, Z., Jiang, S., Feng, H., & Xiao, Y. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp49660.2025.10890406 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, Z., Zhang, N., Yao, Y., Wang, M., Chen, X., & Chen, H.
- Affiliations
- Ant Group (China) (CN)
- Tencent (China) (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2310.02129
- OpenAlex
- W4387356300
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Tencent
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (62206246)
- Zhejiang University
- Natural Science Foundation of Ningbo (2021J190)
- Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (226-2023-00138)
- Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (LGG22F030011)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- knowledge editing, large language models, knowledge conflicts, factual knowledge, benchmark dataset, evaluation metrics, butterfly effect
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
