DebugLM: Learning Traceable Training Data Provenance for LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) are trained through multi-stage pipelines over heterogeneous data sources, yet developers lack a principled way to pinpoint the specific data responsible for an observed behavior. This lack of observability reduces debugging to reactive patching and makes failures prone to recur under distribution shift or subsequent model updates. To address this limitation, we propose DebugLM, a framework that equips LLMs with built-in data provenance, enabling them to explicitly trace the origins of their behaviors to specific training data sources. Specifically, the model learns to associate its responses with unique provenance tags that indicate the responsible dataset, empowering developers to precisely identify where undesirable behaviors are learned. Building on this capability, DebugLM further supports targeted test-time remediation, enabling developers to selectively trigger targeted refusal for specified data sources without retraining or modifying model parameters. Experiments demonstrate that DebugLM provides accurate behavior tracing in multi-stage training pipelines and effective test-time remediation while preserving the general utility of the model.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Mar 2026.
Builds on
29 of 43 references.
References · 29
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,886
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,741
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,386
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 860
- 2019Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learningcited by 629
- 2020Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient Descentcited by 580
17 more
- 2024TOFU: A Task of Fictitious Unlearning for LLMscited by 533
- 2024The WMDP Benchmark: Measuring and Reducing Malicious Use With Unlearningcited by 509
- 2021Asleep at the Keyboard? Assessing the Security of GitHub Copilot's Code Contributionscited by 431
- 2023Safety-Tuned LLaMAs: Lessons From Improving the Safety of Large Language Models that Follow Instructionscited by 387
- 2023Studying Large Language Model Generalization with Influence Functionscited by 326
- 2023TRAK: Attributing Model Behavior at Scalecited by 283
- 2024Tamper-Resistant Safeguards for Open-Weight LLMscited by 138
- 2023What's In My Big Data?cited by 129
- 2023Cognitive Overload: Jailbreaking Large Language Models with Overloaded Logical Thinkingcited by 81
- 2020Radioactive data: tracing through trainingcited by 67
- 2024UnUnlearning: Unlearning is not sufficient for content regulation in advanced generative AIcited by 51
- 2022First is Better Than Last for Language Data Influencecited by 34
- 2023Test-time Backdoor Mitigation for Black-Box Large Language Models with Defensive Demonstrationscited by 21
- 2023SEMQA: Semi-Extractive Multi-Source Question Answeringcited by 19
- 2024Mitigating Backdoor Threats to Large Language Models: Advancement and Challengescited by 15
- 2025RedCoder: Automated Multi-Turn Red Teaming for Code LLMscited by 9
- 2025Learning Efficient Guardrails for Compliancecited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.