Challenge: Existing studies have explained to what extent LLMs extract conflicting knowledge from the provided text, but they neglect the necessity to reason with conflicting information.
Approach: They construct a dataset for knowledge conflict resolution examination in the form of question answering that divides reasoning with conflicting knowledge into three levels.
Outcome: The proposed dataset enables analysis of reasoning with conflicting knowledge in the form of question answering.

Similar Papers

Tracking the Limits of Knowledge Propagation: How LLMs Fail at Multi-Step Reasoning with Conflicting Knowledge (2026.eacl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing benchmarks for analyzing the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) focus on single knowledge updates and fact recall, but do not consider how these updates affect downstream reasoning.
Approach: They propose a benchmark to study how LLMs propagate new knowledge when it conflicts with the model's parametric knowledge.
Outcome: The proposed benchmark compared models with no updated facts to show that the new methods worsen performance and improve reasoning performance.
Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A Survey (2024.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: This survey examines knowledge conflicts for large language models (LLMs) this survey aims to shed light on strategies for improving the robustness of LLMs .
Approach: They focus on three categories of knowledge conflicts: context-memory, inter-context, and intra-membry conflict.
Outcome: The findings highlight the challenges faced by large language models when blending contextual and parametric knowledge.
Disentangling Reasoning Logic to Resolve Explicit Knowledge Conflicts (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing approaches to resolve explicit knowledge conflicts are based on semantic decoding and auxiliary embedding.
Approach: They propose a framework that adjudicates conflicts by structuring the underlying logic.
Outcome: Experiments show that the proposed framework improves on existing models.
How Large Language Models Balance Internal Knowledge with User and Document Assertions (2026.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large language models often need to balance their internal parametric knowledge with external information, such as user beliefs and content from retrieved documents, in real-world scenarios like RAG or chat-based systems.
Approach: They propose a three-source interaction framework to evaluate 27 large language models from 3 families on 2 datasets.
Outcome: The proposed framework systematically evaluates 27 large language models from 3 families on 2 datasets.
Conflicting Needles in a Haystack: How LLMs behave when faced with contradictory information (2025.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in retrieving and analyzing complex information, but their reliability in conflicting contexts remains poorly understood.
Approach: They propose an adversarial extension of the Needle-in-a-Haystack framework in which three mutually exclusive “needles” are embedded within long documents.
Outcome: The proposed framework highlights critical limitations in the robustness of current LLMs—including commercial systems—to contradiction.
DIVKNOWQA: Assessing the Reasoning Ability of LLMs via Open-Domain Question Answering over Knowledge Base and Text (2024.findings-naacl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Retrievalaugmented LLMs have been used to ground LLM in external knowledge . a gap exists in the current landscape regarding the effectiveness of grounding LLM on heterogeneous knowledge sources.
Approach: They propose a model that uses symbolic language to generate symbolic queries . they use a dataset that is generated using predefined reasoning chains and human annotation .
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms previous approaches by a significant margin in QA tasks over text.
LINKED: Eliciting, Filtering and Integrating Knowledge in Large Language Model for Commonsense Reasoning (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit poor performance on knowledge-intensive tasks, such as commonsense reasoning.
Approach: They propose a method to elicit, filter and integrate knowledge in large language models (LINKED) they propose 'reward model' to filter out noisy knowledge and 'take marginal consistent reasoning module'
Outcome: The proposed method outperforms SOTA baselines on two commonsense reasoning tasks.
Task Matters: Knowledge Requirements Shape LLM Responses to Context–Memory Conflict (2026.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Prior work has shown that large language models favor parametric knowledge under conflict, but this setting assumes that tasks should always rely on the provided passage.
Approach: They propose a model-agnostic diagnostic framework that holds underlying knowledge constant while injecting controlled conflicts across tasks with varying knowledge requirements.
Outcome: Evaluating representative open-source LLMs, the proposed framework holds underlying knowledge constant while injecting controlled conflicts across tasks with varying knowledge requirements.
Discerning and Resolving Knowledge Conflicts through Adaptive Decoding with Contextual Information-Entropy Constraint (2024.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing decoding methods for large language models (LLMs) are specialized in resolving knowledge conflicts and could inadvertently deteriorate performance in absence of conflicts.
Approach: They propose an adaptive decoding method to discern whether knowledge conflicts occur and resolve them by a contextual information-entropy constraint decoding technique.
Outcome: The proposed method improves the model’s faithfulness to conflicting context and maintains high performance among non-conflicting contexts.
Tug-of-War between Knowledge: Exploring and Resolving Knowledge Conflicts in Retrieval-Augmented Language Models (2024.lrec-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing knowledge conflicts in RALMs can ensnare them in a tug-of-war between knowledge and evidence, limiting their practical applicability.
Approach: They propose a method called Conflict-Disentangle Contrastive Decoding (CD2) to better calibrate the model’s confidence.
Outcome: The proposed method can resolve knowledge conflicts in large language models with the help of conflict-disentangle contrast decoding (CD2) .

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations