Papers › EditPropBench: Measuring Factual Edit Propagation in Scientific Manuscripts
EditPropBench: Measuring Factual Edit Propagation in Scientific Manuscripts
Garvin Kruthof
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Local factual edits in scientific manuscripts often create non-local revision obligations. If a dataset changes from 215 to 80 documents, claims such as 'medium-scale' or 'a few hundred items' may also become stale, even though they do not repeat the edited number. In an audit of recent arXiv cs.CL benchmark and dataset papers, we find fact-dependent qualitative claims in 37.2% of papers, suggesting that this dependency pattern is common in the target genre. We introduce EditPropBench, a benchmark for measuring whether LLM editors propagate factual edits through dependent manuscript claims. Each item contains an ML/NLP-style synthetic manuscript, a targeted edit, and a controlled fact graph with sentence-level labels for direct targets, required downstream updates, and unrelated text that should remain unchanged. We summarize cascade success with Edit-Ripple Adherence (ERA), the fraction of required downstream updates correctly revised, and validate the metric with adversarial probes and stress-test variants. On the hardest cases, where dependent claims use implicit or free-form wording rather than repeating the edited value, five LLM editing systems span ERA 0.148-0.705. Even the strongest misses roughly 30% of required cascade updates. This advantage persists in a mixed evaluation that includes easy cases solvable by deterministic substitution. EditPropBench shows that current LLM editors can repair many implicit consequences of factual edits, but reliable scientific revision still requires cascade-aware checking.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2605.02083")
Code
Syntology Ran 14 of 28 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 14 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · violated contract; 4 ran · our draft was wrong; 9 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 28 samples from 1 repository, 14 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
28 samples harvested; 14 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 14 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 28 of the 28 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from kruthof/EditCoherenceBench. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
37094dc8345ed6c2 · report
e1f6d2bcd254ad8f · report
dfca3ef1360e156e · report
d8e6c2e3ddf1e3a7 · report
d20494e0a07c59dc · report
7a3de1d2e21ad9a9 · report
9ed0fdb3323d626d · report
6476544361228475 · report
e69cd5eff6b21e67 · report
51da8e7b162a21f0 · report
3c161d0359b0b840 · report
4335beea0eb46870 · report
8be514bf3ca41ce2 · report
31e8330ecef2f9b1 · report
9a9b924bc6de9b85 · report
0658b06d7db4f1cd · report
03d0977d3a070323 · report
35e055fa2c2e7b08 · report
5d9fec9afdd3b417 · report
3e3d6e79bd0bdd60 · report
f7bec01a3c1b6aed · report
20da1cb98e985fe4 · report
71aa1cbf4fb9358e · report
85b2cb21b5d90c66 · report
99c69f487be4faa1 · report
abf4c1bcfd8bdea3 · report
a8463ac1f544a361 · report
3b498419563f0c04 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2605.02083, was issued in May 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections