CoRE Benchmark Exposes LLM Data-Cleaning Reliance on Known Entities
Cleaning or Recalling? Knowledge Dependence in LLM-based Data Cleaning [Experiment, Analysis & Benchmark]
Benchmark scores on data cleaning may measure memorised entity knowledge rather than repair skill, so leaderboard rankings deserve scepticism when the underlying rows are public. Teams using LLMs to clean operational data should test on renamed surrogates or fresh records before trusting reported accuracy. The released controlled tables and offline replay scoring code make it straightforward to rerun the protocol on in-house data.
A new study introduces CoRE (Cleaning or Recalling), a protocol that compares LLM performance on public data-cleaning benchmarks against fresh records and name-surrogate tables that preserve error positions while masking familiar entity names. Across 21 controlled tables and eight LLMs, repair accuracy varies sharply with entity names: replacing names with word-based surrogates drops DeepSeek-V4-Pro's year accuracy from 91% to 18%. Commercial models rewrite assigned directors on known films at rates up to 0.404 despite explicit table-evidence instructions, and a screened continuation probe finds no positive evidence of benchmark-row memory. The paper also shows reference scoring can disagree with external records, such as an ISSN correction on Rayyan receiving no credit while 94% of TabClean's credited repairs reproduce the reference transformation.
Cleaning or Recalling? Knowledge Dependence in LLM-based Data Cleaning [Experiment, Analysis & Benchmark]
High scores on public data-cleaning benchmarks can reflect knowledge of familiar entities, making it difficult to assess how well an LLM repairs unfamiliar data. We present CoRE (Cleaning or Recalling), a protocol comparing public benchmarks with fresh real records and paired name surrogates built from English words or syllables. The surrogates retain error positions and non-identity values while transferring the benchmark's error mechanisms. Across 21 controlled tables and eight LLMs, repair performance varies substantially with entity names on Hospital and, for commercial models, Movies. Renaming removes some information needed for repair, such as a film's identifier mapping. It also affects repairs whose candidates remain available: replacing entity names with word-based surrogates lowers DeepSeek-V4-Pro's year accuracy from 91% to 18%. On Hospital and Movies, commercial models score higher on fresh records than on word-based surrogates. A screened continuation probe finds no positive evidence of benchmark-row memory in the tested models. Familiar facts can conflict with the task. Even with explicit table-evidence instructions, commercial models rewrite assigned directors at rates of 0.000-0.404 on known films. Reference scoring can also disagree with external records. On Rayyan, an ISSN correction matching a title-matched PubMed record receives no credit, whereas 94% of TabClean's credited repairs reproduce the reference date transformation. We provide controlled tables, scoring code and materials for offline replay.
- Thomas Wolf11-04 17:04原文