knowledge-updating · proposedAbsorbing and flexibly using new knowledge
Proposed. Several papers in the review queue converged on this framing, so the pipeline added it. Nobody has decided it is the right way to carve up the subject — it may be two topics, or a duplicate of another, or not a topic at all. Saying so is useful.
Covers whether newly injected or post-training facts can be recalled under paraphrase, combined, and used to override stale beliefs; excludes retrieval-based grounding at inference time.
Tags: general
Proposed from the ingestion pipeline rather than chosen by hand. 2 papers in the review queue independently pointed at this same competence, arriving under 2 different names (knowledge-injection- generalization, knowledge-updating), which is the signal that it is a real recurring topic and not one author's framing. Two papers describe the same gap between storing and actually using new facts, which long- term-memory does not cover.
What counts as this capability
Scope boundary used when deciding whether a paper is really about this capability, rather than merely mentioning it.
Covers whether newly injected or post-training facts can be recalled under paraphrase, combined, and used to override stale beliefs; excludes retrieval-based grounding at inference time.
Claims
No claims filed yet.
Techniques
None yet.
Capabilities are a way of carving up the subject, and carvings are arguable. Say so if this one is wrong — especially a proposed one, which a pipeline added because several papers used the same framing, not because anyone decided it was right.