Understanding Finetuning for Factual Knowledge Extraction
Gaurav Rohit Ghosal, Tatsunori Hashimoto, Aditi Raghunathan
Abstract
In this work, we study the impact of QA fine-tuning data on downstream factuality. We show that fine-tuning on lesser-known facts that are poorly stored during pretraining yields significantly worse factuality than fine-tuning on well-known facts, even when all facts are seen during pretraining. We prove this phenomenon theoretically, showing that training on lesser-known facts can lead the model to ignore subject entity names and instead output a generic plausible response even when the relevant factual knowledge is encoded in the model. On three question answering benchmarks (PopQA, Entity Questions, and MMLU) and two language models (Llama-2-7B and Mistral-7B), we find that (i) finetuning on a completely factual but lesser-known subset of the data deteriorates downstream factuality (5-10%) and (ii) finetuning on a subset of better-known examples matches or outperforms finetuning on the entire dataset. Ultimately, our results shed light on the interaction between pretrained knowledge and finetuning data and demonstrate the importance of taking into account how facts are stored in the pretrained model when fine-tuning for knowledge-intensive tasks.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers21
- Does Fine-Tuning LLMs on New Knowledge Encourage Hallucinations?Zorik Gekhman, Gal Yona, Roee Aharoni, Matan Eyal et al.EMNLP 2024 · 53 citations
- Learning to Reason for FactualityXilun Chen, Ilia Kulikov, Vincent-Pierre Berges, Barlas Oğuz et al.ICML 2026 · 22 citations
- Data Mixing Can Induce Phase Transitions in Knowledge AcquisitionXinran Gu, Kaifeng Lyu, Jiazheng Li, Jingzhao ZhangNeurIPS 2025 · 16 citations
- Improving Model Factuality with Fine-grained Critique-based EvaluatorYiqing Xie, Wenxuan Zhou, Pradyot Prakash, Di Jin et al.ACL 2025 · 16 citations
- Learning Facts at Scale with Active ReadingJessy Lin, Vincent-Pierre Berges, Xilun Chen, Wen-tau Yih et al.ICLR 2026 · 15 citations
Builds on15
- Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language ModelKenneth Li, Oam Patel, Fernanda B. Viégas, Hanspeter Pfister et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 1,549 citations
- Large Language Models Struggle to Learn Long-Tail KnowledgeNikhil Kandpal, Haikang Deng, Adam Roberts, Eric Wallace et al.ICML 2023 · 623 citations
- Fine-Tuning Language Models for FactualityKatherine Tian, Eric Mitchell, Huaxiu Yao, Christopher D. Manning et al.ICLR 2024 · 270 citations
- Physics of Language Models: Part 3.1, Knowledge Storage and ExtractionZeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi LiICML 2024 · 258 citations
- When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric MemoriesAlex Mallen, Akari Asai, Victor Zhong, Rajarshi Das et al.ACL 2023 · 233 citations
Related papers
- Analyzing the Effects of Supervised Fine-Tuning on Model Knowledge from Token and Parameter LevelsJunjie Ye, Yuming Yang, Yang Nan, Shuo Li et al.EMNLP 2025
- KnowTuning: Knowledge-aware Fine-tuning for Large Language ModelsYougang Lyu, Lingyong Yan, Shuaiqiang Wang, Haibo Shi et al.EMNLP 2024 · 3 citations
- How Do Large Language Models Acquire Factual Knowledge During Pretraining?Hoyeon Chang, Jinho Park, Seonghyeon Ye, Sohee Yang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 124 citations
- Fine-Tuning or Retrieval? Comparing Knowledge Injection in LLMsOded Ovadia, Menachem Brief, Moshik Mishaeli, Oren ElishaEMNLP 2024 · 89 citations
- Fictitious Synthetic Data Can Improve LLM Factuality via Prerequisite LearningYujian Liu, Shiyu Chang, Tommi S. Jaakkola, Yang ZhangICLR 2025
