cs.LGApr 25, 2026

When Context Sticks: Studying Interference in In-Context Learning

Authors: Hanna RødDagny StreitNils Valseth SelteJustin Li

Abstract

This paper investigates context stickiness in in-context learning (ICL), a phenomenon where earlier examples in a prompt interfere with a transformer's ability to adapt to later tasks. Using synthetic regression tasks over linear and quadratic functions, we examine how models trained under sequential, mixed, and random curricula handle abrupt task switches during inference. By sweeping over structured combinations of misleading linear examples followed by recovery quadratic examples, we quantify how prior context biases prediction error and how quickly models realign. Our results show strong evidence of persistent interference: more preceding linear examples reliably degrade quadratic predictions, while additional quadratic examples reduce error but with diminishing returns. We further find that training curricula significantly modulate resilience, with sequential training on the target function class yielding the fastest recovery, and surprisingly, random training producing the least robust behavior.

Explore similar work

May 27, 2026cs.LG

Understanding Generalization and Forgetting in In-Context Continual Learning

In-context learning (ICL) derives its power from enabling Large Language Models to adapt to new tasks via prompt-based reasoning alone, entirely bypassing the need for parameter updates. Existing theories primarily study ICL in single-task settings, while real-world prompts often contain sequences of heterogeneous tasks, leaving a gap in understanding whether Large Language Models implicitly perform continual learning during inference. To bridge this gap, we propose the first theoretical framework for in-context continual learning, modeling how a pretrained Transformer processes multiple sequential tasks within a single prompt through shared attention mechanisms. Focusing on linear and masked linear self-attention, we derive error expressions for model predictions under sequential task prompts and analyze their generalization and forgetting behavior. Our results reveal that standard attention mechanisms inevitably induce intertask interference by uniformly or causally aggregating historical contexts, leading to systematic bias. We further provide a bias-variance-interference decomposition of prediction error, characterizing when historical in-context information yields positive transfer or provable negative transfer. This analysis exposes fundamental limits of attention-based continual inference and offers theoretical explanations for order sensitivity and performance degradation in long prompts.
Guangyu Li, Meng Ding, Lijie Hu
Jul 4, 2026stat.ML

Sequential Correlations Change In-Context Learning: Effective Context Length and Architectural Mismatch

Modern sequence models have a striking capacity for in-context learning (ICL); they can perform new tasks based only on examples given in the prompt. Understanding how this ability emerges requires theory that captures important properties of natural data. Linear regression has served as a useful sandbox for ICL theory, but existing work has largely focused on prompts with independent examples. In this work, we extend this setting to sequentially correlated data, a basic feature of real sequences. We present a solvable model based on linear attention and test our predictions on realistic transformer architectures. We identify two distinct effects: First, when the query token is independent of the context, within-context correlations induce an effective context length: correlated prompts behave like shorter i.i.d. prompts. Second, when the query is also correlated with its context, test error is reduced, particularly for softmax attention when compared to linear attention. These results suggest that correlated prompts alter not only the effective sample size of in-context learning, but also which attention architectures are best matched to the task.
Mary Letey, Yue M. Lu, Cengiz Pehlevan +1
May 25, 2026cs.LG

When Correct Demonstrations Hurt: Rethinking the Role of Exemplars in In-Context Learning

In-context learning (ICL) is often motivated by the intuition that demonstrations help because they provide correct input-output examples. However, we reveal a counterintuitive phenomenon: correctness does not guarantee exemplar utility, and some correct demonstrations can even reduce ICL accuracy. To study this correctness-utility gap, we introduce task-preserving perturbations, where only the exemplar input is changed, while the example remains a correct instance of the same task. Concretely, each perturbed exemplar is assigned the target induced by the task mapping. This framework covers both label-updating perturbations, where task-relevant semantics change and targets are recomputed, and stricter target-preserving perturbations, where the original target remains valid. We formalize the resulting failure mode as contextual evidence shift: task-preserving perturbations can change the effective mixture of evidence used by the model for contextual inference, thereby separating exemplar correctness from exemplar utility. Across sentiment classification, logical reasoning, and math word problems, we find that task-preserving perturbed demonstrations can substantially degrade ICL performance, especially for smaller models, harder tasks, and higher perturbation ratios. Our results show that robust ICL requires evaluating not only whether demonstrations are correct, but also how they influence contextual inference. Code is available at https://github.com/Chenghao-Qiu/Task-Preserving-ICL.
Chenghao Qiu, Chunli Peng, Yufeng Yang +2