The DOI matches its DataCite record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Locate-then-edit for Multi-hop Factual Recall under Knowledge Editing
Abstract
The locate-then-edit paradigm has shown significant promise for knowledge editing (KE) in Large Language Models (LLMs). While previous methods perform well on single-hop fact recall tasks, they consistently struggle with multi-hop factual recall tasks involving newly edited knowledge. In this paper, leveraging tools in mechanistic interpretability, we first identify that in multi-hop tasks, LLMs tend to retrieve knowledge with implicit subject information from deeper MLP layers, unlike single-hop tasks, which rely on shallow layers. This distinction explains the poor performance of current methods in multi-hop queries, as they primarily focus on editing shallow layers with single-hop edit prompts, leaving deeper layers unchanged. To address this, we propose IFMET, a novel locate-then-edit KE approach designed to edit both shallow and deep MLP layers. Beyond single-hop editing prompts, IFMET further incorporates multi-hop editing prompts to locate and modify knowledge across different stages of reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that IFMET significantly improves performance on multi-hop factual recall tasks, overcoming the limitations of previous locate-then-edit methods
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?
In the citing paper
“Activation patching provides a causal perspective by substituting activations between inputs to identify which components are necessary and sufficient for specific behaviors (Wang et al. 2022; Zhang et al. 2024; Hong et al. 2024).”
From When Truth Is Overridden: Uncovering the Internal Origins of Sycophancy in Large Language Models (2026) · cites this paper as Zhang et al. 2024
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
Zero-Shot Relation Extraction via Reading Comprehension
Levy, O., Seo, M., Choi, E., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2017) · Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL 2017) · doi:10.18653/v1/k17-1034 · Cited by 482 · cited 2×
“…weights in a range of layers; MeLLo , which manages multi-hop knowledge editing by decomposing subproblems and detecting conflicts; PMET , which optimizes FFN hidden states for precise weight updates, achieving SOTA performance in COUNTERFACT (Meng et al., 2022a) and ZsRE (Levy et al., 2017).”
BackgroundEmergent World Representations: Exploring a Sequence Model Trained on a Synthetic Task
Li, K., Hopkins, A. K., Bau, D., Viégas, F., Pfister, H., & Wattenberg, M. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.13382 · Cited by 61
Model Editing with Canonical Examples
Hewitt, J., Chen, S., Xie, L. L., Adams, E., Liang, P., & Manning, C. D. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.06155 · Cited by 1
Cited by
When Truth Is Overridden: Uncovering the Internal Origins of Sycophancy in Large Language Models
Wang, K., Li, J., Yang, S., Zhang, Z., & Wang, D. (2026) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v40i39.40645 · Cited by 8
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, Z., Li, Y., Kan, Z., Cheng, K., Hu, L., & Wang, D.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- arXiv
- 2410.06331
- References
- 3
- Type
- Preprint
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.