Multi-hop question answering (MQA) under knowledge editing (KE) has garnered significant attention in the era of large language models. However, existing models for MQA under KE exhibit poor performance when dealing with questions containing explicit temporal contexts. To address this limitation, we propose a novel framework, namely TEMPoral knowLEdge augmented Multi-hop Question Answering (TEMPLE-MQA). Unlike previous methods, TEMPLE-MQA first constructs a time-aware graph (TAG) to store edit knowledge in a structured manner. Then, through our proposed inference path, structural retrieval, and joint reasoning stages, TEMPLE-MQA effectively discerns temporal contexts within the question query. Experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate that TEMPLE-MQA significantly outperforms baseline models. Additionally, we contribute a new dataset, namely TKEMQA, which serves as the inaugural benchmark tailored specifically for MQA with temporal scopes.
Large language models (LLMs) have shown exceptional abilities for multiple different natural language processing tasks. While prompting is a crucial tool for LLM inference, we observe that there is a significant cost associated with exceedingly lengthy prompts. Existing attempts to compress lengthy prompts lead to sub-standard results in terms of readability and interpretability of the compressed prompt, with a detrimental impact on prompt utility. To address this, we propose PROMPT-SAW: Prompt compresSion via Relation AWare graphs, an effective strategy for prompt compression over task-agnostic and task-aware prompts. PROMPT-SAW uses the prompt's textual information to build a graph, later extracts key information elements in the graph to come up with the compressed prompt. We also propose GSM8K-AUG, i.e., an extended version of the existing GSM8k benchmark for task-agnostic prompts in order to provide a comprehensive evaluation platform. Experimental evaluation using benchmark datasets shows that prompts compressed by PROMPT-SAW are not only better in terms of readability, but they also outperform the best-performing baseline models by up to 14.3 and 13.7 respectively for task-aware and task-agnostic settings while compressing the original prompt text by 33.0 and 56.7.
With the rise of large language models (LLMs), ensuring they embody the principles of being helpful, honest, and harmless (3H), known as Human Alignment, becomes crucial. While existing alignment methods like RLHF, DPO, etc., effectively fine-tune LLMs to match preferences in the preference dataset, they often lead LLMs to highly receptive human input and external evidence, even when this information is poisoned. This leads to a tendency for LLMs to be Adaptive Chameleons when external evidence conflicts with their parametric memory. This exacerbates the risk of LLM being attacked by external poisoned data, which poses a significant security risk to LLM system applications such as Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). To address the challenge, we propose a novel framework: Dialectical Alignment (DA), which (1) utilizes AI feedback to identify optimal strategies for LLMs to navigate inter-context conflicts and context-memory conflicts with different external evidence in context window (i.e., different ratios of poisoned factual contexts); (2) constructs the SFT dataset as well as the preference dataset based on the AI feedback and strategies above; (3) uses the above datasets for LLM alignment to defense poisoned context attack while preserving the effectiveness of in-context knowledge editing. Our experiments show that the dialectical alignment model improves poisoned data attack defense by 20 and does not require any additional prompt engineering or prior declaration of ``you may be attacked`` to the LLMs' context window.