跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.02273 · v1

When the Text Is Silent: Memory Shortcuts and the Validity of LLM Annotation under Evidence Insufficiency

首次提交 2026-11-02 06:54
版本更新 2026-11-02 06:54
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:42
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to annotate text for social science research, content moderation, and training data. Their broad knowledge of real-world entities raises a concern: when labeling a text, do they rely on its evidence or substitute what they already know? We call this behavior a memory shortcut and examine when it emerges, what amplifies it, and how to mitigate it. Using 995 widely recognized public figures and four matched control names per figure, we construct counterfactual texts that separate textual evidence from prior knowledge, and evaluate three commercial LLMs on 121,594 prompts each across five stages. We find a striking asymmetry. Although all models recognize nearly every figure, none follows memory over the text when the two conflict. Shortcuts instead emerge when evidence is absent: for one model, famous names raise the rate of remembered occupations, ages, and countries by 17.0, 14.9, and 6.8 percentage points relative to synthetic names. These effects occur only for recognized figures, and 98.6% of the resulting labels are factually correct about the namesake while none is supported by the text. Evaluation threats and answer-contingent rewards amplify shortcuts by 8.7 and 12.4 points. Famous names also raise leadership ratings of sparsely documented applicants by 0.22 and 0.28 points in two models. A namesake reminder and name masking each eliminate the shortcuts, with trade-offs in gender annotation. LLM annotations can thus be factually correct yet methodologically invalid. Trustworthy LLM annotation requires audits that test evidence absence, account for incentives in annotation instructions, and evaluate the attribute-specific trade-offs of mitigation.

作者备注:15 pages, 5 figures

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-02 06:54 · 最新观测版本

When the Text Is Silent: Memory Shortcuts and the Validity of LLM Annotation under Evidence Insufficiency

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to annotate text for social science research, content moderation, and training data. Their broad knowledge of real-world entities raises a concern: when labeling a text, do they rely on its evidence or substitute what they already know? We call this behavior a memory shortcut and examine when it emerges, what amplifies it, and how to mitigate it. Using 995 widely recognized public figures and four matched control names per figure, we construct counterfactual texts that separate textual evidence from prior knowledge, and evaluate three commercial LLMs on 121,594 prompts each across five stages. We find a striking asymmetry. Although all models recognize nearly every figure, none follows memory over the text when the two conflict. Shortcuts instead emerge when evidence is absent: for one model, famous names raise the rate of remembered occupations, ages, and countries by 17.0, 14.9, and 6.8 percentage points relative to synthetic names. These effects occur only for recognized figures, and 98.6% of the resulting labels are factually correct about the namesake while none is supported by the text. Evaluation threats and answer-contingent rewards amplify shortcuts by 8.7 and 12.4 points. Famous names also raise leadership ratings of sparsely documented applicants by 0.22 and 0.28 points in two models. A namesake reminder and name masking each eliminate the shortcuts, with trade-offs in gender annotation. LLM annotations can thus be factually correct yet methodologically invalid. Trustworthy LLM annotation requires audits that test evidence absence, account for incentives in annotation instructions, and evaluate the attribute-specific trade-offs of mitigation.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗