When Benchmarks Leak: Inference-Time Decontamination for LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Benchmark-based evaluation is the de facto standard for comparing large language models (LLMs). However, its reliability is increasingly threatened by test set contamination, where test samples or their close variants leak into training data and artificially inflate reported performance. To address this issue, prior work has explored two main lines of mitigation. One line attempts to identify and remove contaminated benchmark items before evaluation, but this inevitably alters the evaluation set itself and becomes unreliable when contamination is moderate or severe. The other line preserves the benchmark and instead suppresses contaminated behavior at evaluation time; however, such interventions often interfere with normal inference and lead to noticeable performance degradation on clean inputs. We propose DeconIEP, a decontamination framework that operates entirely during evaluation by applying small, bounded perturbations in the input embedding space. Guided by a relatively less-contaminated reference model, DeconIEP learns an instance-adaptive perturbation generator that steers the evaluated model away from memorization-driven shortcut pathways. Across multiple open-weight LLMs and benchmarks, extensive empirical results show that DeconIEP achieves strong decontamination effectiveness while incurring only minimal degradation in benign utility.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Jan 2026.
Builds on
9 of 25 references.
References · 9
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
- 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principlescited by 839
- 2018ML-Leaks: Model and Data Independent Membership Inference Attacks and Defenses on Machine Learning Modelscited by 475
- 2024Large Language Model Unlearning via Embedding-Corrupted Promptscited by 112
- 2024Unveiling the Spectrum of Data Contamination in Language Models: A Survey from Detection to Remediationcited by 30
- 2025Analyzing Memorization in Large Language Models through the Lens of Model Attributioncited by 14
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026From GPT-3 to GPT-5: Mapping their capabilities, scope, limitations, and consequencescited by 3
- 2026An Interpretable and Scalable Framework for Evaluating Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Uncertainty-based Debiasing and Unlearning for Decontaminationcited by 0
- 2026Detecting Pretraining Data in Large Language Models from a Free-Energy Perspectivecited by 0
- 2026Uncheatable Eval: Dynamic Compression-Based Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Uncheatable Eval: Dynamic Compression-Based Evaluation of Language Models23 Sep 2026
- 2026Detecting Pretraining Data in Large Language Models from a Free-Energy Perspective18 Sep 2026
- 2026Uncertainty-based Debiasing and Unlearning for Decontamination22 Jun 2026
- 2026An Interpretable and Scalable Framework for Evaluating Large Language Models7 May 2026
- 2026From GPT-3 to GPT-5: Mapping their capabilities, scope, limitations, and consequences11 Apr 2026