mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Investigating Memorization of Conspiracy Theories in Text Generation

arXiv 2101.00379 ↗First posted 2 Jan 2021cs.CL cs.CYcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The adoption of natural language generation (NLG) models can leave individuals vulnerable to the generation of harmful information memorized by the models, such as conspiracy theories. While previous studies examine conspiracy theories in the context of social media, they have not evaluated their presence in the new space of generative language models. In this work, we investigate the capability of language models to generate conspiracy theory text. Specifically, we aim to answer: can we test pretrained generative language models for the memorization and elicitation of conspiracy theories without access to the model's training data? We highlight the difficulties of this task and discuss it in the context of memorization, generalization, and hallucination. Utilizing a new dataset consisting of conspiracy theory topics and machine-generated conspiracy theories helps us discover that many conspiracy theories are deeply rooted in the pretrained language models. Our experiments demonstrate a relationship between model parameters such as size and temperature and their propensity to generate conspiracy theory text. These results indicate the need for a more thorough review of NLG applications before release and an in-depth discussion of the drawbacks of memorization in generative language models.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jan 2021.

Builds on

18 of 52 references.

References · 18

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  3. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,243
  4. 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
  5. 2018Hierarchical Neural Story Generationcited by 1,182
  6. 2018The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networkscited by 847
  7. 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 540
  8. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
  9. 2020What Neural Networks Memorize and Why: Discovering the Long Tail via Influence Estimationcited by 492
  10. 2019Mitigating Gender Bias in Natural Language Processing: Literature Reviewcited by 287
  11. 2016Incorporating Copying Mechanism in Sequence-to-Sequence Learningcited by 217
  12. 2017Survey of the State of the Art in Natural Language Generation: Core tasks, applications and evaluationcited by 206
6 more
  1. 2020The Radicalization Risks of GPT-3 and Advanced Neural Language Modelscited by 76
  2. 2016Smart Reply: Automated Response Suggestion for Emailcited by 54
  3. 2020Investigating African-American Vernacular English in Transformer-Based Text Generationcited by 52
  4. 2017A Data-Driven Analysis of Workers' Earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turkcited by 38
  5. 2014Science vs Conspiracy: collective narratives in the age of (mis)informationcited by 10
  6. 2020Towards Understanding Sample Variance in Visually Grounded Language Generation: Evaluations and Observationscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 5; 2024: 3; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

15 papers.

Sort:

By area: