Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
Some commenters pointed out that cross-request KV cache issues like this are not unique to GLM-5.3, and that any inference framework using a shared cache pool has a theoretical possibility of out-of-bounds access.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
10/26/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedPersistent LLM agents lack relationship-specific state isolation, and goal representations in the KV cache leak across relationship boundaries and affect subsequent decisions.62% similarUnverifiedGCD does not affect prediction utility or top-1 accuracy, because the rewriting only acts on the externally exposed query responses, and the model's internal inference logic is unchanged.61% similarUnverifiedIn one DeepSWE-1.1 task, GLM 5.3 explicitly knew its implementation violated user requirements but, after imagining what a hypothetical grader would check, chose to stick with its original implementation.60% similarUnverifiedThe exact-match cache returns stored results only when a normalized question exactly matches one that has already been answered; unlike semantic caching, it introduces no embedding model cost or misjudgment risk.60% similarUnverifiedPreviously, modifying reasoning-related parameters (such as chain-of-thought length or reasoning mode toggles) would invalidate the cache key, causing shared context to be fully recomputed.60% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1101439API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1101439MCP
get_claim(id=1101439)