# The Curious Case of Factual (Mis)Alignment between LLMs' Short- and Long-Form Answers

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.11218 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.11218/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 26 of its 66 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.05250/) (2016)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.03551/) (2017)
- [Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.05262/) (2022)
- [Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Size](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00118/) (2024)
- [Gemma 3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19786/) (2025)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 small](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.00593/) (2022)
- [Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14997/) (2023)
- [ELI5: Long Form Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.09190/) (2019)
- [Dissecting Recall of Factual Associations in Auto-Regressive Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14767/) (2023)
- [A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03011/) (2021)
- [Towards Best Practices of Activation Patching in Language Models: Metrics and Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.16042/) (2023)
- [How Language Model Hallucinations Can Snowball](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13534/) (2023)
- [On LLMs-Driven Synthetic Data Generation, Curation, and Evaluation: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.15126/) (2024)
- [How to use and interpret activation patching](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.15255/) (2024)
- [Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.07521/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models for Software Engineering: Survey and Open Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03533/) (2023)
- [Have Faith in Faithfulness: Going Beyond Circuit Overlap When Finding Model Mechanisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.17806/) (2024)
- [Knowledge Circuits in Pretrained Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17969/) (2024)
- [Are formal and functional linguistic mechanisms dissociated in language models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.11302/) (2025)
- [Hallucinate at the Last in Long Response Generation: A Case Study on Long Document Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15291/) (2025)

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

- [Alignment-Aware Model Adaptation via Feedback-Guided Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02258/) (2026)
- [The Chronicles of RiDiC: Generating Datasets with Controlled Popularity Distribution for Long-form Factuality Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.00019/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) can correctly answer "When was Einstein born?" yet fail to provide the same date when writing about Einstein's life revealing a fundamental inconsistency in how models access factual knowledge across task complexities. While models display impressive accuracy on factual question-answering benchmarks, the reliability gap between simple and complex queries remains poorly understood, eroding their trustworthiness. In this work, we introduce Short-Long Form Alignment for Factual Question Answering (SLAQ), a controlled evaluation framework that compares LLMs' answers to the same factual questions asked (a) in isolation (short) vs. (b) integrated into complex queries (long). Looking at 16 LLMs across 600 queries, we find a systematic misalignment of answers to the corresponding short and long queries. We further uncover position-dependent accuracy loss and momentum effects where consecutive correct or incorrect answers create self-reinforcing patterns. Through mechanistic analysis, we find that aligned facts activate overlapping model internals, and that metrics based on mechanistic similarity can predict short-long answer alignment with up to 78% accuracy. Our work establishes factual consistency over query complexity as an important aspect of LLMs' trustworthiness and challenges current evaluation practices, which implicitly assume that good performance for simple factual queries implies reliability in more complex knowledge-seeking tasks too.