EMNLP Findings2023
Impact of Co-occurrence on Factual Knowledge of Large Language Models
Cheongwoong Kang, Jaesik Choi
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) often make factually incorrect responses despite their success in various applications. In this paper, we hypothesize that relying heavily on simple cooccurrence statistics of the pre-training corpora is one of the main factors that cause factual errors. Our results reveal that LLMs are vulnerable to the co-occurrence bias, defined as preferring frequently co-occurred words over the correct answer. Consequently, LLMs struggle to recall facts whose subject and object rarely co-occur in the pre-training dataset although they are seen during finetuning. We show that co-occurrence bias remains despite scaling up model sizes or finetuning. Therefore, we suggest finetuning on a debiased dataset to mitigate the bias by filtering out biased samples whose subject-object co-occurrence count is high. Although debiased finetuning allows LLMs to memorize rare facts in the training set, it is not effective in recalling rare facts unseen during finetuning. Further research in mitigation will help build reliable language models by preventing potential errors. The code is available at https://github.com/CheongWoong/ impact_of_cooccurrence.
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Lune answers from
the full paper · 12 top-tier papers that cite it · related work
Free to start. No credit card required.
Cited by top-tier papers12
- Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A SurveyRongwu Xu, Zehan Qi, Zhijiang Guo, Cunxiang Wang et al.EMNLP 2024 · 38 citations
- Understanding Transformers via N-Gram StatisticsTimothy NguyenNeurIPS 2024 · 28 citations
- Towards Neuron Attributions in Multi-Modal Large Language ModelsJunfeng Fang, Zac Bi, Ruipeng Wang, Houcheng Jiang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 16 citations
- Co-occurrence is not Factual Association in Language ModelsXiao Zhang, Miao Li, Ji WuNeurIPS 2024 · 15 citations
- FragFM: Hierarchical Framework for Efficient Molecule Generation via Fragment-Level Discrete Flow MatchingJoongwon Lee, Seonghwan Kim, Seokhyun Moon, Hyunwoo Kim et al.ICLR 2026 · 6 citations
Builds on20
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language ModelsEdward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu et al.ICLR 2022 · 18,833 citations
- Finetuned Language Models are Zero-Shot LearnersJason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu et al.ICLR 2022 · 4,966 citations
- Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task GeneralizationVictor Sanh, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, Stephen H. Bach et al.ICLR 2022 · 1,976 citations
- AutoPrompt: Eliciting Knowledge from Language Models with Automatically Generated PromptsTaylor Shin, Yasaman Razeghi, Robert L. Logan IV, Eric Wallace et al.EMNLP 2020 · 1,162 citations
Related papers
- Does Fine-Tuning LLMs on New Knowledge Encourage Hallucinations?Zorik Gekhman, Gal Yona, Roee Aharoni, Matan Eyal et al.EMNLP 2024 · 53 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
- FLAME : Factuality-Aware Alignment for Large Language ModelsSheng-Chieh Lin, Luyu Gao, Barlas Oguz, Wenhan Xiong et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 63 citations
- He is very intelligent, she is very beautiful? On Mitigating Social Biases in Language Modelling and GenerationAparna Garimella, Akhash Amarnath, Kiran Kumar, Akash Pramod Yalla et al.ACL Findings 2021 · 32 citations
- Co²PT: Mitigating Bias in Pre-trained Language Models through Counterfactual Contrastive Prompt TuningXiangjue Dong, Ziwei Zhu, Zhuoer Wang, Maria Teleki et al.EMNLP Findings 2023 · 5 citations
