# Large Language Models Could Be Rote Learners

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.08300 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.08300/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 46 of its 63 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Apr 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 46)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07830/) (2019)
- [Mistral 7B](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06825/) (2023)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.07805/) (2020)
- [Qwen2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.10671/) (2024)
- [MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01574/) (2024)
- [CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.00937/) (2018)
- [Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04132/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.08232/) (2018)
- [Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.07646/) (2022)
- [Extracting Training Data from Diffusion Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.13188/) (2023)
- [AGIEval: A Human-Centric Benchmark for Evaluating Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06364/) (2023)
- [C-Eval: A Multi-Level Multi-Discipline Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08322/) (2023)
- [LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13076/) (2024)
- [Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.15004/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.03882/) (2023)
- [Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.05374/) (2023)
- [Detecting Pretraining Data from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16789/) (2023)
- [NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.18018/) (2023)
- [Physics of Language Models: Part 3.1, Knowledge Storage and Extraction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.14316/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Sensitivity to The Order of Options in Multiple-Choice Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11483/) (2023)
- [Proving Test Set Contamination in Black Box Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17623/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Illusions of Confidence? Diagnosing LLM Truthfulness via Neighborhood Consistency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05905/) (2026)
- [Probing the Structure and Dynamics of LLM Value Expression through Value Conflicts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.07296/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Benchmark-based evaluation, e.g., multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and open-ended questions (OEQs), is widely used for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs), yet their reliability is undermined by benchmark contamination. When pre-exposed to the testing benchmark during training, less capable LLMs have been found to achieve inflated performance, thereby yielding erroneous results in LLM evaluation. In this study, we reframe contamination as an inherent aspect of learning and seek to disentangle and expose genuine capability acquisition from superficial memorization in LLM evaluation. Following this, firstly, by analyzing model performance under different memorization conditions of MCQs, we uncover a counterintuitive trend: LLMs perform worse on memorized benchmarks than on non-memorized ones, indicating the coexistence of two learning phenomena, i.e., rote memorization and genuine capability learning. To disentangle them, we propose TrinEval, a novel evaluation framework that reformulates MCQs into an alternative knowledge-centric trinity format, reducing memorization while preserving inherent knowledge, enabling the evaluation of genuine capability in the presence of memorization. Extensive experiments validate the effectiveness and robustness of TrinEval in reformulating benchmarks, and the evaluation results further reveal that mainstream LLMs rely on rote memorization for an average of 19.6% of knowledge points across the MMLU and the GSM8K dataset.