It is shown, across two experiments and six LLMs, that source attribution depends on how conversational memory is structured: ceiling accuracy for self-generated content under minimal memory demands reverses to a fragile external-item advantage once episodic delay removes that shortcut.
Abstract
A conversational AI that cannot tell its own output from what a user said will treat its own mistakes as user-provided facts. In humans, this capacity is called reality monitoring, and its failures are linked to hallucinations, delusions, and confabulation, yet whether LLMs possess it remains untested. Here we show, across two experiments and six LLMs, that source attribution depends on how conversational memory is structured: ceiling accuracy for self-generated content under minimal memory demands reverses to a fragile external-item advantage once episodic delay removes that shortcut. Feedback exposes two failures: in some models, internal and external judgments swap; in others, accuracy improves while confidence decouples from correctness, dissociations invisible to existing benchmarks. Across models, this pattern implicates active, not aggregate, parameter count. This suggests that as AI systems take on autonomous, multi-turn roles, evaluating what they know is not enough: tracking where that knowledge came from may matter equally.
A self-reflective framework in which an LLM generates an answer, identifies claims that may be uncertain, performs an internal verification stage, and revises the response before delivery is proposed.
Priti Sharma, Sachin Sharma· Iconic research and engineer...· 0 citations
This paper argues that human-LLM interaction constitutes a language game in which one side bears all normative activity, and draws on Wittgenstein, Luhmann, Esposito, and Brandom to reclassify each as a receiver-side phenomenon, grounds guardrails as structural necessities rather than manifestations of machine moral ag...
Can interacting with someone from 1930, with no knowledge of what happened after, influence a person's perception of the past? People reason about the present against a picture of the past without observing it. The past is reconstructed from memory and testimony, but this reconstruction has been filtered through everyt...
Hiromu Yakura, Robin Schimmelpfennig, Ezequiel Lopez-Lopez et al.· 0 citations
VoiceLongMemEval (VLME) benchmark, where every answer depends on paralinguistic metadata attached to conversational turns, which is otherwise unrecoverable from the words alone, is presented.
This paper develops a comprehensive where-what-how taxonomy that characterizes where situational illusions occur, what targets they take, and how they arise, and introduces MSIBench, a benchmark designed to assess the discrimination, understanding, and reasoning capabilities of MLLMs under situational illusions.
Zhi-Ming Yang, Zhuoxi Xiong, Dong-Lin Zhou et al.· 0 citations
It is hypothesize that existing benchmarks and user satisfaction are tracking different capabilities: benchmarks measure elicited retrieval (recall when asked), while conversation requires natural integration (detecting relevance and naturally weaving prior context into a response).
Ryuichi Sumida, K. Inoue, Tatsuya Kawahara· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.