Suppressed, Not Erased: A Representational Trace of Edited Facts Survives Even Weight-Free Knowledge Editing
Knowledge-editing benchmarks certify local correctness, whether an edited model produces the new fact on near-edit prompts but not how much of the…
Why am I seeing this Ranked on source trust — arXiv
It ranks mainly on source trust: arXiv is the most reliable outlet we track on this subject, and is the only one on the story so far.
The classifier could not identify the subject from the text, so the section was inherited from the source feed. We do not summarise what we cannot identify — this one links straight out.
Link-outLink-out, because the subject could not be identified from the text. Link-out means we point at the publisher and say nothing of our own.
| Factor | Weight | Score | Contribution | Where it came from |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Corroboration | 0.35 | 0.39 | +0.135 34% | 1 independent org on the story. Tier-3 aggregators never corroborate — they can show something is circulating, never that it is true. |
| Source trustleads | 0.25 | 0.85 | +0.212 53% | arXiv is the highest-trust source on this story and is first-party — the organisation announcing its own news. Trust is taken from the best source, not averaged. |
| Pickup rate | 0.20 | 0.00 | +0.000 0% | One counted organisation, so there is no spread to measure — nothing has picked this up to set a rate. |
| Freshness | 0.20 | 0.27 | +0.054 14% | Halves every 10 hours from the newest item on the story. This is the only factor that rewards a story for nothing more than being recent. |
Corroboration counts distinct organisations, once each, and only from tiers 1 and 2. Freshness halves every 10 hours, so this ranking is a snapshot and will differ at the next build.
What happened
Knowledge-editing benchmarks certify local correctness, whether an edited model produces the new fact on near-edit prompts but not how much of the original fact remains decodable inside the model. We study residual knowledge directly with a linear trace probe: after editing a fact, we ask whether the original object is still recoverable from the model's hidden states. On GPT-2-XL, across three mechanistically distinct editors applied to 50 CounterFact edits, the original object remains linearly decodable well above chance after a successful edit (probe accuracy 0.96 for ROME, 0.86 for constrained fine-tuning, and 0.79 for the memory-based editor GRACE, against a chance level of 0.50; all edits reach 100% generation-based success).
How this story arrived
Ordered by when each source was first observed, which is what the velocity figure is computed from. Publishers backdate; observed order does not.
- 01 Arxivfirst-party first seen Suppressed, Not Erased: A Representational Trace of Edited Facts Survives Even Weight-Free K
Overclock clusters coverage from independent sources and grades it automatically. The figures above are computed, not editorial. This page summarises and links to reporting by the outlets named — follow the links for the original work.