Skip to yearly menu bar Skip to main content

Spotlight Poster

Does Localization Inform Editing? Surprising Differences in Causality-Based Localization vs. Knowledge Editing in Language Models

Peter Hase · Mohit Bansal · Been Kim · Asma Ghandeharioun

Great Hall & Hall B1+B2 (level 1) #1526
[ ]
[ Paper [ Poster [ OpenReview
Tue 12 Dec 8:45 a.m. PST — 10:45 a.m. PST


Language models learn a great quantity of factual information during pretraining, and recent work localizes this information to specific model weights like mid-layer MLP weights. In this paper, we find that we can change how a fact is stored in a model by editing weights that are in a different location than where existing methods suggest that the fact is stored. This is surprising because we would expect that localizing facts to specific model parameters would tell us where to manipulate knowledge in models, and this assumption has motivated past work on model editing methods. Specifically, we show that localization conclusions from representation denoising (also known as Causal Tracing) do not provide any insight into which model MLP layer would be best to edit in order to override an existing stored fact with a new one. This finding raises questions about how past work relies on Causal Tracing to select which model layers to edit. Next, we consider several variants of the editing problem, including erasing and amplifying facts. For one of our editing problems, editing performance does relate to localization results from representation denoising, but we find that which layer we edit is a far better predictor of performance. Our results suggest, counterintuitively, that better mechanistic understanding of how pretrained language models work may not always translate to insights about how to best change their behavior.

Chat is not available.