Suhang Wu , Ante Wang , Minlong Peng , Yujie Lin , Wenbo Li , Mingming Sun , Jinsong Su
{"title":"博士:评估基于文档的知识编辑","authors":"Suhang Wu , Ante Wang , Minlong Peng , Yujie Lin , Wenbo Li , Mingming Sun , Jinsong Su","doi":"10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Knowledge editing aims to correct outdated or inaccurate knowledge in neural networks. In this paper, we explore knowledge editing using easily accessible documents instead of manually labeled factual triples employed in earlier research. To advance this field, we establish the first evaluation benchmark, <em>DocTER</em>, featuring <u>Doc</u>uments containing coun<u>TER</u>factual knowledge for editing. A comprehensive four-perspective evaluation is introduced: <em>Edit Success</em>, <em>Locality</em>, <em>Reasoning</em>, and <em>Cross-lingual Transfer</em>, comprising 2,000, 2,000, 583, 1,000 test cases, respectively. To adapt conventional triplet-based knowledge editing methods for this task, we develop an <em>Extract-then-Edit</em> pipeline that extracts triples from documents before applying existing methods. Experiments on popular knowledge editing methods demonstrate that editing with documents presents significantly greater challenges than using triples. In document-based scenarios, even the best-performing in-context editing approach still lags behind by 10 points in editing success when compared to using gold triples. This observation also holds for both reasoning and cross-lingual test sets. We further analyze key factors influencing task performance, including the quality of extracted triples, the frequency and position of edited knowledge in documents, various methods for enhancing reasoning, and performance differences across various directions in cross-lingual knowledge editing, which provide valuable insights for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50365,"journal":{"name":"Information Processing & Management","volume":"63 1","pages":"Article 104299"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DocTER: Evaluating document-based knowledge editing\",\"authors\":\"Suhang Wu , Ante Wang , Minlong Peng , Yujie Lin , Wenbo Li , Mingming Sun , Jinsong Su\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104299\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Knowledge editing aims to correct outdated or inaccurate knowledge in neural networks. In this paper, we explore knowledge editing using easily accessible documents instead of manually labeled factual triples employed in earlier research. To advance this field, we establish the first evaluation benchmark, <em>DocTER</em>, featuring <u>Doc</u>uments containing coun<u>TER</u>factual knowledge for editing. A comprehensive four-perspective evaluation is introduced: <em>Edit Success</em>, <em>Locality</em>, <em>Reasoning</em>, and <em>Cross-lingual Transfer</em>, comprising 2,000, 2,000, 583, 1,000 test cases, respectively. To adapt conventional triplet-based knowledge editing methods for this task, we develop an <em>Extract-then-Edit</em> pipeline that extracts triples from documents before applying existing methods. Experiments on popular knowledge editing methods demonstrate that editing with documents presents significantly greater challenges than using triples. In document-based scenarios, even the best-performing in-context editing approach still lags behind by 10 points in editing success when compared to using gold triples. This observation also holds for both reasoning and cross-lingual test sets. We further analyze key factors influencing task performance, including the quality of extracted triples, the frequency and position of edited knowledge in documents, various methods for enhancing reasoning, and performance differences across various directions in cross-lingual knowledge editing, which provide valuable insights for future research.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Processing & Management\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 104299\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Processing & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457325002407\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Processing & Management","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457325002407","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Knowledge editing aims to correct outdated or inaccurate knowledge in neural networks. In this paper, we explore knowledge editing using easily accessible documents instead of manually labeled factual triples employed in earlier research. To advance this field, we establish the first evaluation benchmark, DocTER, featuring Documents containing counTERfactual knowledge for editing. A comprehensive four-perspective evaluation is introduced: Edit Success, Locality, Reasoning, and Cross-lingual Transfer, comprising 2,000, 2,000, 583, 1,000 test cases, respectively. To adapt conventional triplet-based knowledge editing methods for this task, we develop an Extract-then-Edit pipeline that extracts triples from documents before applying existing methods. Experiments on popular knowledge editing methods demonstrate that editing with documents presents significantly greater challenges than using triples. In document-based scenarios, even the best-performing in-context editing approach still lags behind by 10 points in editing success when compared to using gold triples. This observation also holds for both reasoning and cross-lingual test sets. We further analyze key factors influencing task performance, including the quality of extracted triples, the frequency and position of edited knowledge in documents, various methods for enhancing reasoning, and performance differences across various directions in cross-lingual knowledge editing, which provide valuable insights for future research.
期刊介绍:
Information Processing and Management is dedicated to publishing cutting-edge original research at the convergence of computing and information science. Our scope encompasses theory, methods, and applications across various domains, including advertising, business, health, information science, information technology marketing, and social computing.
We aim to cater to the interests of both primary researchers and practitioners by offering an effective platform for the timely dissemination of advanced and topical issues in this interdisciplinary field. The journal places particular emphasis on original research articles, research survey articles, research method articles, and articles addressing critical applications of research. Join us in advancing knowledge and innovation at the intersection of computing and information science.