Positional Fragility in LLMs: How Offset Effects Reshape Our Understanding of Memorization Risks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models are known to memorize parts of their training data, posing risk of copyright violations. To systematically examine this risk, we pretrain language models (1B/3B/8B) from scratch on 83B tokens, mixing web-scale data with public domain books used to simulate copyrighted content at controlled frequencies at lengths at least ten times longer than prior work. We thereby identified the offset effect, a phenomenon characterized by two key findings: (1) verbatim memorization is most strongly triggered by short prefixes drawn from the beginning of the context window, with memorization decreasing counterintuitively as prefix length increases; and (2) a sharp decline in verbatim recall when prefix begins offset from the initial tokens of the context window. We attribute this to positional fragility: models rely disproportionately on the earliest tokens in their context window as retrieval anchors, making them sensitive to even slight shifts. We further observe that when the model fails to retrieve memorized content, it often produces degenerated text. Leveraging these findings, we show that shifting sensitive data deeper into the context window suppresses both extractable memorization and degeneration. Our results suggest that positional offset is a critical and previously overlooked axis for evaluating memorization risks, since prior work implicitly assumed uniformity by probing only from the beginning of training sequences.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 May 2025.
Builds on
23 of 36 references.
References · 23
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
- 2023Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinkscited by 2,186
- 2019Megatron-LM: Training Multi-Billion Parameter Language Models Using Model Parallelismcited by 1,868
- 2024The FineWeb Datasets: Decanting the Web for the Finest Text Data at Scalecited by 1,160
- 2022Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Modelscited by 763
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 714
- 2022Deduplicating Training Data Mitigates Privacy Risks in Language Modelscited by 314
- 2017Train longer, generalize better: closing the generalization gap in large batch training of neural networkscited by 279
- 2022Efficient Training of Language Models to Fill in the Middlecited by 255
- 2022Are Large Pre-Trained Language Models Leaking Your Personal Information?cited by 200
- 2023Emergent and Predictable Memorization in Large Language Modelscited by 148
- 2023Speak, Memory: An Archaeology of Books Known to ChatGPT/GPT-4cited by 125
11 more
- 2021Large-Scale Differentially Private BERTcited by 118
- 2023Copyright Violations and Large Language Modelscited by 108
- 2018Revisiting Small Batch Training for Deep Neural Networkscited by 102
- 2022Preventing Verbatim Memorization in Language Models Gives a False Sense of Privacycited by 100
- 2024Demystifying Verbatim Memorization in Large Language Modelscited by 56
- 2024Grammar-Aligned Decodingcited by 54
- 2024Be like a Goldfish, Don't Memorize! Mitigating Memorization in Generative LLMscited by 50
- 2023Repetition In Repetition Out: Towards Understanding Neural Text Degeneration from the Data Perspectivecited by 39
- 2022MAUVE Scores for Generative Models: Theory and Practicecited by 36
- 2024Causal Estimation of Memorisation Profilescited by 20
- 2024Exploring Memorization and Copyright Violation in Frontier LLMs: A Study of the New York Times v. OpenAI 2023 Lawsuitcited by 18
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.