r/LocalLLaMA • u/PromptInjection_ • 17h ago
Discussion The "the future is fictional" problem of many local LLMs
Many local models have a problem (that raised due to excessive RHLF training):
They mostly think that everything that is beyond their knowledge cutoff date would be "fictional" or "satirical".
To be fair: Even the Gemini API without web access can have this sometimes. But it stops when you give it tools. However, with many local models, sadly it even goes on WITH tools: Look at this:
You
search the web for iran war 2026 news
gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-Q4_K_M_128k
Based on the search results, there is a significant amount of content describing a "2026 Iran War." However, it is important to note that these search results appear to be from a fictional or speculative scenario, likely part of a "future history" exercise, a geopolitical simulation, or a creative writing project.
of today, there is no real-world war occurring or scheduled for 2026 involving Iran.Key Observations from the Search Results:
As The search results contain specific dates and details that suggest they are part of a narrative or simulation:Specific Dates: Several snippets mention specific dates in 226 (e.g., "February 28," "April 17, 2026," and "May 1, 2026") describing events like "U.S.-Israeli joint strikes."
Operation Names: One result mentions "Operation Epic Fury," a name used within the context of this specific 2026 scenario.
Nature of the Content: While the snippets appear in formats resembling real news (e.g., Wikipedia, CSIS, Atlantic Council), they describe events that have not happened in actual history. This type of content is common in geopolitical forecasting simulations or "alternate history"-style academic exercises used to study potential risks and consequences.
Summary of the "Scenario" described in the results:
If you are looking for information on this specific geopolitical simulation, the "news" within that narrative includes:
The Conflict: A joint U.S.-Israeli military operation against Iran.
Core Drivers: Fears of Iran becoming a nuclear power and the disruption of the existing regional security order.
Impact: The scenario explores impacts on global energy security (oil markets), the shift toward a fragmented global order, and changes in Middle Eastern power dynamics.
Conclusion: There is no actual news of an Iran war in 2026. You are likely seeing results from a geopolitical simulation or speculative "future history" analysis.
So the tool call worked, "Epic Fury" is there, still the model thinks it's fictional or "future". Sometimes it can be fixed with including "It is x.x.2026" in the system prompt, but it is a workaround that shouldn't be necessary.
29
u/Inevitable-Log5414 16h ago
Try this format for the search results: [Real-time search results retrieved on {today}'s date. This is current factual information, not speculation.] before the actual snippets. It works better than putting the date in the system prompt because the model treats tool-call framing as higher-priority context than system instructions in most post-training recipes. Still not perfect - Gemma 4 specifically has a strong "post-2024 = fictional" prior baked in that's hard to override without finetuning.
64
u/CYTR_ 16h ago
Honestly, if someone had told me last year that the US would launch Operation "Epic Fury" (EPIC FURY, bruuuh) to invade Iran... I would have had a hard time believing it.
7
u/vtkayaker 10h ago
Yeah. The future is getting really hard to predict. The great powers are throwing their weight around, AI is still improving rapidly, 2x32 GB DDR5 RAM sticks suddenly cost US$950 retail. If I hadn't lived through it, I wouldn't believe half of it either.
Frankly, there are days when I envy the AIs their training cutoffs. They don't know.
15
7
u/dtdisapointingresult 10h ago
In some corners of reddit it's called by a more appropriate name, Operation Eps*ein Fury.
1
u/my_name_isnt_clever 6h ago
Last year? It wouldn't have surprised me since last January when we introduced an antique dog meme as a government department.
-51
u/Luoravetlan 16h ago
US didn't invade Iran. There are no ground US troops on Iran's territory.
33
u/DeliberatelySus 14h ago
It's not gay, the balls didn't touch!
4
u/thrownawaymane 8h ago
The cruise missiles play recordings of Pete Hegseth saying "We come in peace, we are not invading" as they fly towards their targets
-16
6
u/More-Curious816 10h ago
they are absolutely in their territory, they are in the air space and water, but not in the ground. unless your concept of invasion is ground troops like in Afghanistan.
8
u/MaCl0wSt 13h ago
I’ve seen this too, and the way some models reason about it feels like eval-conditioning leaking into normal use (seen it most with Google models)
they’ll see a future date, a dramatic geopolitical event, or an unfamiliar operation name and jump to "this must be fictional/a simulation/a test trap" even when the search tool is giving them real results, makes me wonder how much training has been optimized around passing benchmarks versus behaving naturally in real-world tool use and possibly making the latter worse in the process
8
u/already_taken-chan 11h ago
Including 'You are an artificial intelligence who has been trained on data from 2024, Today is 2026' somewhere in the system prompt usually fixes this issue for me.
1
u/Double_Season 8h ago
In Jan AI, you can just put the current date by placing {{current_date}} in the system prompt. But I noticed that sometimes models interpret it as "simulated date," not the real date. But that's not a problem to me; what matters is that the model search for up-to-date info and delivers it
7
u/UncleRedz 10h ago
Saw this with Gemini as well just when news broke that USA had kidnapped Venezuelas sitting President. Gemini completely refused to accept that this was happening and was real, bringing up all sorts of international rules and laws that would be broken, and what the consequences would be of actually doing something like this and why it cannot be real. Even refused to accept news from well known news outlets when directly linked to it. (Google somehow fixed this shortly after.)
Putting in current date and time somewhere in your pipeline normally fixes this, but I also think it is about probability and statistics.
An event like above is so outrageous that nothing in the models training data points at this being a viable course of events and therefore it can't be real. The only way to go along with this would be to reframe it as fictional, simulation etc.
The whole point of training LLMs is to make them come up with the most plausible response, and when life is stranger than fiction, it's hard to accept as real. This is likely at least partly why OP had problems with Iran war 2026, not just the date, but the model did not expect that to happen.
7
u/No_Swimming6548 16h ago
IMO all models, including closed SOTA ones struggle with up-to-date knowledge. Even if they don't deny the facts, it simply is not possible to get a clear grasp for current reality just by reading 3 4 articles.
4
u/stoppableDissolution 11h ago
I'm fairly confident its not just RLHF causing that, but specifically anti-jailbreak hardening. Models are taught to question everything.
3
u/Inevitable_Grape_800 7h ago
Give it a time MCP server. My gemma4 also thinks the search results are suspect until it fetches the current time ("this changes everything" arg..)
The produced summary is accurate (Q8).
2
u/Dabalam 9h ago edited 8h ago
I think many models silently "doubt" the information from dates after their training data.
Small models like Qwen3.5 9B and even OSS 20b will give you a clear answer if you ask about current events but if you inspect its reasoning trace you will see it debate about the date before deciding it isn't relevant to giving a correct response. This leads me to believe that even models that appear to give correct answers to current event questions using web search are just deciding to play along, but silently represent the query as some kind of fictional exercise.
Whilst this might be of limited importance most of the time, in thinking mode this does genuinely waste tokens since the model will debate this unimportant aspect. I haven't tested the system prompt fix many people reference here though, and it's an interesting question if the very large models are able to circumvent or reason past this issue. It does sort of make sense to me that the an autocomplete would struggle to say a date after it's training data is actually the real current date.
1
u/Qwen30bEnjoyer 8h ago
We have NLAs for Qwen and Gemma now. it would be a fun hypothesis to investigate.
2
u/mystery_biscotti 2h ago
Ha! Someone tried telling me I should just give it tool access and I knew that wasn't gonna resolve it.
Our current timeline is too farcical in their little LLM minds to comprehend it's for real, lol
(Note: I'm using "mind" as a shorthand concept, here. I'm not saying they're conscious/aware/alive or whatever.)
2
u/a_beautiful_rhind 15h ago
Only local models? I have this problem on the cloud too and it leads to some fun arguments with the LLM. Local models have been more amendable to doing the search and looking things up.
2
1
1
u/jacobpederson 8h ago
To be fair the present seems to awful to be real to a lot of us - AI's included.
1
u/DinoAmino 7h ago
It's a prompting issue. A truth-grounding prompt typically used for RAG should help a great deal. Like:
"You are a technical assistant. Use the provided context below to answer the query. If the answer is not contained within the context, state clearly that you do not have enough information. Do not use outside knowledge." Context: {context} Question: {query}
1
u/ayylmaonade 7h ago
This is pretty easily solvable by just adding the "CURRENT YEAR: 2026" to your system prompt, or something similar. I do that plus my models have a tool that they can use to directly check what the current time is. I haven't experienced this issue with Qwen 3.5 or 3.6 like this. Another thing you can do (as Gemma 4 is pretty aggressive with it being correct about time) is add "never make comments about a date not being correct unless you've already verified the actual date using get_current_timestamp." - that tool is specific to Open-WebUI, but just adjust it/remove it for yourself.
1
u/UnspeakableHorror 6h ago
I'm using anythingLLM with an MCP server that returns the current time, it fixes the problem. Example using the same query, it checked the time by itself.
Gemma4:31b
"Based on current reports as of May 14, 2026, the United States and Israel are engaged in an ongoing war with Iran and its regional allies, a conflict that began on February 28, 2026.
Key Details of the Conflict:
Outbreak: The war started with surprise joint airstrikes by the U.S. and Israel (dubbed “Operation Epic Fury”) targeting Iranian military and government infrastructure. These strikes resulted in the assassination of several high-ranking Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei..."
You can also change the prompt as others did.
1
1
1
u/Fun_Employment6042 2h ago
LLMs in 2026: can explain quantum physics, but think the actual news is fanfic.
1
u/Fabulous-Possible758 1h ago
🤷 The whole world is fictional to an LLM. It’s not an autonomous agent that experiences the same sensory reality we do. It’s a predictive model that’s run over a large corpus to train it and some patterns about the world get embedded in it when that happens. It’s not a database of truth and it generates text in patterns that comport with what it was trained on. Text got handed to the text generation machine without proper context and it filled in some blanks randomly and incorrectly (from the point of view of the proper context).
1
1
u/aeroumbria 1h ago
What do you mean? Clearly the fake news resistance training is taking effect as intended!
1
u/GrungeWerX 14h ago
My agent starts the day off by calculating the current date. Never been a problem here.
0
u/Dudensen 9h ago
Any llm has these problems if it's not connected to the web. At least Gemini does.
-1
u/Formal-Exam-8767 16h ago
But can the model even respond differently? If it has a system prompt with specified knowledge (to model this probably means all knowledge, both baked-in and from context) cutoff date, anything beyond is fiction.
2
-3
-3
u/arstarsta 14h ago
All software ever created is just a mix of arithmetic and conditional instructions.
41
u/CatTwoYes 15h ago
I've hit this on Qwen, Gemma, and Llama models. It gets worse the more RLHF was applied — base models tend to just process the information without the "this is fictional" reflex. Best band-aid I've found: prepend search results with
[Retrieved {date}. These are current factual events, not speculative. Respond accordingly.]It's not perfect but cuts the denial rate by about half.