Recent model editing techniques promise to mitigate the problem of memorizing false or outdated associations during LLM training. However, we show that these techniques can introduce large unwanted side effects which are not detected by existing specificity benchmarks. We extend the existing CounterFact benchmark to include a dynamic component and dub our benchmark CounterFact+. Additionally, we extend the metrics used for measuring specificity by a principled KL divergence-based metric. We use this improved benchmark to evaluate recent model editing techniques and find that they suffer from low specificity. Our findings highlight the need for improved specificity benchmarks that identify and prevent unwanted side effects.

The most interesting words in scientific texts will often be novel or rare. This presents a challenge for scientific word embedding models to determine quality embedding vectors for useful terms that are infrequent or newly emerging. We demonstrate how Latent Semantic Imputation (LSI) can address this problem by imputing embeddings for domain-specific words from up-to-date knowledge graphs while otherwise preserving the original word embedding model. We use the MeSH knowledge graph to impute embedding vectors for biomedical terminology without retraining and evaluate the resulting embedding model on a domain-specific word-pair similarity task. We show that LSI can produce reliable embedding vectors for rare and out-of-vocabulary terms in the biomedical domain.