Weixin Zeng
Publications
Navigating Unreliable Parametric and Contextual Knowledge: Explicit Knowledge Conflict Resolution for LLM Inference
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance across a wide range of language-based tasks by leveraging both extensive parametric knowledge and in-context learning ability, enabling them to incorporate external information provided in the input prompt. However, the integration of external knowledge can introduce conflicts, not only between the model's internal parametric knowledge and the external information, but also among multiple pieces of external contexts. Existing approaches typically assume that either the model or the provided context is reliable, overlooking the possibility that both sources may contain errors, and avoid conflicts by privileging one source over the other, rather than actively resolving inconsistencies. To address these limitations, we propose a novel framework MACR for LLM knowledge conflict resolution that moves beyond the conventional binary choice paradigm and incorporates an explicit conflict-resolution mechanism based on a multi-agent reasoning approach. Specifically, we first propose an adaptive knowledge assessment and retrieval approach that employs a modified semantic entropy measure to quantify an LLM's confidence in its answer to a given query. Based on this confidence estimation, MACR either externalizes the model's internal knowledge as textual representations or retrieves relevant external knowledge when internal knowledge is insufficient, generating basic contexts for subsequent reasoning. Then we introduce an inductive multi-agent reasoning framework with three specialized agents that, respectively, induce explicit rules, analyze potential conflicts, and resolve inconsistencies across all available contexts. Empirical results demonstrate that MACR significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across benchmarks, while also providing interpretable resolutions of explicit conflicts.
Panning for Gold: Expanding Domain-Specific Knowledge Graphs with General Knowledge
Domain-specific knowledge graphs (DKGs) are critical yet often suffer from limited coverage compared to General Knowledge Graphs (GKGs). Existing tasks to enrich DKGs rely primarily on extracting knowledge from external unstructured data or completing KGs through internal reasoning, but the scope and quality of such integration remain limited. This highlights a critical gap: little systematic exploration has been conducted on how comprehensive, high-quality GKGs can be effectively leveraged to supplement DKGs. To address this gap, we propose a new and practical task: domain-specific knowledge graph fusion (DKGF), which aims to mine and integrate relevant facts from general knowledge graphs into domain-specific knowledge graphs to enhance their completeness and utility. Unlike previous research, this new task faces two key challenges: (1) high ambiguity of domain relevance, i.e., difficulty in determining whether knowledge from a GKG is truly relevant to the target domain , and (2) cross-domain knowledge granularity misalignment, i.e., GKG facts are typically abstract and coarse-grained, whereas DKGs frequently require more contextualized, fine-grained representations aligned with particular domain scenarios. To address these, we present ExeFuse, a neuro-symbolic framework based on a novel Fact-as-Program paradigm. ExeFuse treats fusion as an executable process, utilizing neuro-symbolic execution to infer logical relevance beyond surface similarity and employing target space grounding to calibrate granularity. We construct two new datasets to establish the first standardized evaluation suite for this task. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ExeFuse effectively overcomes domain barriers to achieve superior fusion performance.