Specification Oracles
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Specifications face a basic tradeoff: leave details out, and important questions go unanswered; record every detail separately, and the specification becomes large and prolix. We investigate whether a language model can serve as a compact, living specification oracle by learning facts about a target and answering questions about it directly. We compare two ways of storing the learned facts: external text notes and changes to the model's weights. Across four families of 596-fact worlds and two Qwen2.5 model sizes, weight-only oracles benefited substantially more from structure: with the 7B model, their accuracy integrated across storage capacities was 18.5 percentage points higher on structured than unstructured worlds, compared with 1.1 points for note-sheet oracles. This advantage came at a substantial storage cost, with the smallest adapter requiring approximately 175 KiB compared with a maximum note budget of 16 KiB. Adapted weights therefore exploited latent structure more successfully, while external notes required substantially less object-specific storage.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 8 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Sep 2026.
Builds on
7 of 8 references.
References · 7
- 2020How Much Knowledge Can You Pack Into the Parameters of a Language Model?cited by 719
- 2024Physics of Language Models: Part 3.3, Knowledge Capacity Scaling Lawscited by 144
- 2020Language Models as Knowledge Bases: On Entity Representations, Storage Capacity, and Paraphrased Queriescited by 107
- 2025How much do language models memorize?cited by 61
- 2026Understanding LoRA as Knowledge Memory: An Empirical Analysiscited by 12
- 2026Cram Less to Fit More: Training Data Pruning Improves Memorization of Factscited by 3
- 2026How Much Can a LoRA Adapter Memorize? Measuring Adapter Capacity in Bitscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.