Papers › ComparisonQA: Evaluating Factuality Robustness of LLMs Through Knowledge Frequency...
ComparisonQA: Evaluating Factuality Robustness of LLMs Through Knowledge Frequency Control and Uncertainty
Qing Zong, Zhaowei Wang, Tianshi Zheng, Xiyu Ren, Yangqiu Song
The rapid development of LLMs has sparked extensive research into their factual knowledge. Current works claim that LLMs fall short on questions requiring less frequent knowledge. However, their proof is incomplete since they only study the influence of entity frequency, which can not fully represent knowledge frequency. So we introduce ComparisonQA benchmark, containing 283K abstract questions, each instantiated by a pair of high-frequency and low-frequency entities. It ensures a controllable comparison because the difference of knowledge frequency between such a pair is only related to entity frequency. In addition, to avoid possible semantic shortcuts, which is a severe problem of current LLMs study, we design a two-round method for knowledge robustness measurement utilizing both correctness and uncertainty. Experiments reveal that LLMs exhibit particularly low robustness regarding low-frequency knowledge, and GPT-4o is even the worst under this measurement. Besides, we introduce an automatic method to filter out questions with low-quality and shortcuts to form ComparisonQA-Hard. We find that uncertainty effectively identifies such questions while maintaining the data size.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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