Abstract:Knowledge-intensive language understanding tasks require Language Models (LMs) to integrate relevant context, mitigating their inherent weaknesses, such as incomplete or outdated knowledge. However, conflicting knowledge can be present in the LM's parameters, termed intra-memory conflict, which can affect a model's propensity to accept contextual knowledge. To study the effect of intra-memory conflict on an LM's ability to accept relevant context, we utilize two knowledge conflict measures and a novel dataset containing inherently conflicting data, DynamicQA. This dataset includes facts with a temporal dynamic nature where facts can change over time and disputable dynamic facts, which can change depending on the viewpoint. DynamicQA is the first to include real-world knowledge conflicts and provide context to study the link between the different types of knowledge conflicts. We also evaluate several measures on their ability to reflect the presence of intra-memory conflict: semantic entropy and a novel coherent persuasion score. With our extensive experiments, we verify that LMs exhibit a greater degree of intra-memory conflict with dynamic facts compared to facts that have a single truth value. Furthermore, we reveal that facts with intra-memory conflict are harder to update with context, suggesting that retrieval-augmented generation will struggle with the most commonly adapted facts.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### Problems the Paper Attempts to Solve This paper aims to explore the ability of language models (LMs) to handle knowledge with inherent conflicts. Specifically, the authors focus on the impact of **intra-memory conflict** on the language model's acceptance of relevant contextual information. Intra-memory conflict refers to the presence of contradictory knowledge representations within the language model's parameters, which may affect the model's tendency to accept contextual knowledge. To investigate this issue, the authors introduce two methods for measuring knowledge conflict and construct a new dataset containing inherent conflict data—**DYNAMIC QA**. This dataset includes facts with temporal dynamics (i.e., facts that change over time) and disputable dynamic facts (i.e., facts that change based on different viewpoints). DYNAMIC QA is the first dataset to include real-world knowledge conflicts and provides context to study the relationship between different types of knowledge conflicts. ### Main Research Content 1. **Dataset Construction**: - **Static Facts**: Facts that do not change. - **Temporal Dynamic Facts**: Facts that change over time. - **Disputable Facts**: Facts that change based on different viewpoints. 2. **Knowledge Conflict Measurement**: - **Semantic Entropy**: Used to capture semantic variation in parameter memory. - **Coherent Persuasion Score**: Used to evaluate the semantic variation in the model's output distribution given competing contexts. 3. **Experimental Design**: - Experiments were conducted using three state-of-the-art, similarly sized language models (Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.1, Llama-2-7b-chat-hf, Qwen2-7B-Instruct). - Zero-shot inference was used to minimize the impact of confounding factors. - The models' performance on different types of facts was evaluated, including accuracy, semantic entropy, and coherent persuasion score. ### Main Findings 1. **Static Facts**: - Models generally perform best on static facts and are most easily persuaded by context. - Semantic entropy is low, indicating consistent and less conflicting model outputs. 2. **Temporal Dynamic Facts**: - Providing context reduces the model's intra-memory conflict, but some stubborn instances remain. - Semantic entropy is higher, indicating greater internal conflict when handling temporal dynamic facts. 3. **Disputable Facts**: - Models perform relatively well on disputable facts, but many stubborn instances still exist. - Semantic entropy is higher, indicating greater internal conflict when handling disputable facts. ### Conclusion Through the DYNAMIC QA dataset and various measurement methods, the authors reveal the challenges language models face when dealing with facts that have intra-memory conflicts. In particular, temporal dynamic facts and disputable facts are more likely to cause intra-memory conflicts in the models, affecting their ability to accept contextual information. These findings highlight the need for new measurement methods to assess intra-memory conflict in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and suggest the necessity of further improving the models' ability to utilize context.

DYNAMICQA: Tracing Internal Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models

Resolving Knowledge Conflicts in Large Language Models

ConflictBank: A Benchmark for Evaluating the Influence of Knowledge Conflicts in LLM

Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A Survey

Analysing the Residual Stream of Language Models Under Knowledge Conflicts

Who's Who: Large Language Models Meet Knowledge Conflicts in Practice

Studying Large Language Model Behaviors Under Context-Memory Conflicts With Real Documents

Adaptive Chameleon or Stubborn Sloth: Revealing the Behavior of Large Language Models in Knowledge Conflicts

Tug-of-War Between Knowledge: Exploring and Resolving Knowledge Conflicts in Retrieval-Augmented Language Models

Untangle the KNOT: Interweaving Conflicting Knowledge and Reasoning Skills in Large Language Models

"Merge Conflicts!" Exploring the Impacts of External Distractors to Parametric Knowledge Graphs

Detect-Then-Resolve: Enhancing Knowledge Graph Conflict Resolution with Large Language Model

Insight Over Sight? Exploring the Vision-Knowledge Conflicts in Multimodal LLMs

Unraveling Cross-Modality Knowledge Conflicts in Large Vision-Language Models

Cutting Off the Head Ends the Conflict: A Mechanism for Interpreting and Mitigating Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models

Beneath the Surface of Consistency: Exploring Cross-lingual Knowledge Representation Sharing in LLMs

Understanding the Interplay between Parametric and Contextual Knowledge for Large Language Models

Probing Language Models on Their Knowledge Source

ECon: On the Detection and Resolution of Evidence Conflicts

Entity-Based Knowledge Conflicts in Question Answering