6.7CLMay 22, 2025
Understanding Fact Recall in Language Models: Why Two-Stage Training Encourages Memorization but Mixed Training Teaches KnowledgeYing Zhang, Benjamin Heinzerling, Dongyuan Li et al.
Fact recall, the ability of language models (LMs) to retrieve specific factual knowledge, remains a challenging task despite their impressive general capabilities. Common training strategies often struggle to promote robust recall behavior with two-stage training, which first trains a model with fact-storing examples (e.g., factual statements) and then with fact-recalling examples (question-answer pairs), tending to encourage rote memorization rather than generalizable fact retrieval. In contrast, mixed training, which jointly uses both types of examples, has been empirically shown to improve the ability to recall facts, but the underlying mechanisms are still poorly understood. In this work, we investigate how these training strategies affect how model parameters are shaped during training and how these differences relate to their ability to recall facts. We introduce cross-task gradient trace to identify shared parameters, those strongly influenced by both fact-storing and fact-recalling examples. Our analysis on synthetic fact recall datasets with the Llama-3.2B and Pythia-2.8B models reveals that mixed training encouraging a larger and more centralized set of shared parameters. These findings suggest that the emergence of parameters may play a key role in enabling LMs to generalize factual knowledge across task formulations.
6.7CLAug 27, 2025
Do MLLMs Really Understand the Charts?Xiao Zhang, Dongyuan Li, Liuyu Xiang et al.
Although Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated increasingly impressive performance in chart understanding, most of them exhibit alarming hallucinations and significant performance degradation when handling non-annotated charts. Therefore, a question arises: Do MLLMs really understand the charts? Since a human is capable of understanding charts and estimating the values by visual reasoning, we first carefully establish a comprehensive Chart Reasoning Benchmark CRBench to rigorously evaluate the visual reasoning abilities of MLLMs on non-annotated charts. We argue that MLLMs are primarily relying on recognition rather than reasoning to interpret the charts. To steer MLLMs to reasonable chart understanding, we propose ChartReasoner that mimics human behavior by grounding their estimation in chart understanding. Extensive results on the proposed CRBench show that ChartReasnoner-3B/7B achieves superior performance in chart reasoning, even compared to GPT-4o and Gemini-2.5-Flash. More importantly, ChartReasnoner also demonstrates the visual reasoning abilities in general chart comprehension on public benchmarks, leading to significant performance gains and enabling MLLMs to rationally understand the charts. The code and dataset will be publicly available upon publication.