arXiv AI
Jun 18
CaVe-VLM-CoT: An Interpretable Vision-Language Model Framework
arXiv:2606. 18385v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) remain prone to hallucinations, producing fluent but visually unfaithful outputs.
Catching Hallucinated Citations in Video-LLM Question Answering: A Self-Verification Pipeline and Verifier Ablation Study
arXiv:2608. 15574v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Video question answering systems built on vision-language models often produce timestamped claims with high confidence even when unsupported by the cited frame.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Sep 10
AtomCite: Verification and Correction of Supplied Page-Level Citations in Multi-Page Documents
AtomCite is an agentic framework that verifies and corrects page‑level citations in multi‑page documents by parsing answers into claims, checking each claim against the cited page image, and applying a deterministic repair policy. The authors introduce DocCite, the first benchmark for this task, built on MP‑DocVQA and DUDE, containing 928 injected instances and 1,909 verified natural errors. Across Gemini, Claude, and GPT models, AtomCite achieves about 93% verification accuracy and improves citation precision from 34% to 87‑90%, while also enhancing hallucination detection in open‑source models.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 10
GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation
arXiv:2609.10293v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In high-stakes domains such as legal practice, a language-model answer is only useful to the extent that a reader can verify each claim against the sou...
arXiv AI
Jun 24
EG-VQA: Benchmarking Verifiable Video Question Answering with Grounded Temporal Evidence
arXiv:2606. 24797v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in Video Large Language Models (Video-LLMs) have yielded promising performance on video question answering (VideoQA).
arXiv AI
Sep 21
VidOmni-Bench: A Benchmark for Fine-Grained Video Understanding via Spatio-Temporal Event Verification across Complexity and Duration
VidOmni-Bench is a new benchmark for fine‑grained video understanding that asks models to verify whether each event in dense video captions is supported by the video. It contains 500 videos covering five complexity types and durations from 4 seconds to 90 minutes, and uses human‑verified sentence‑level labels to create hard negatives. Experiments show that Video‑LLMs often hallucinate events, struggle to detect incorrect descriptions, and exhibit varying weaknesses depending on video complexity and duration.
arXiv AI
Jun 30
How Do LLMs Cite? A Mechanistic Interpretation of Attribution in Retrieval-Augmented Generation
arXiv:2606. 28358v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) aims to enhance the trustworthiness of Large Language Models (LLMs) by grounding their outputs in external documents, often using inline citations for verifiability.
arXiv AI
Jul 14
Evidence-Backed Video Question Answering
arXiv:2607. 11862v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current Video Large Language Models (Video LLMs) excel in question answering (QA) but largely operate as black boxes, providing textual answers without verifiable visual grounding.
arXiv AI
Jun 12
Zero-source LLM Hallucination Detection with Human-like Criteria Probing
arXiv:2606. 12900v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often hallucinate by generating factually incorrect or unfaithful content, posing significant risks to their safe use.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 2
Perception First: A Frontier Native-Video Model with Self-Consistency for Implicit Video Question Answering
arXiv:2606. 01485v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We describe our submission to the VRR Challenge @ CVPR 2026, built on the \emph{ImplicitQA} / \emph{VRR-QA} benchmark~\cite{implicitqa}: multiple-choice video question answering in which answers are deliberately \emph{not} observable in any single frame and must be inferred from spatial layout, motion, depth, viewpoint, causality, and social context across discontinuous frames of creative video.
arXiv AI
Jun 12
GEASS: Gated Evidence-Adaptive Selective Caption Trust for Vision-Language Models
arXiv:2605. 01733v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) hallucinate objects that are not present, and a growing line of work tries to curb this by feeding the model its own generated caption as auxiliary evidence -- assuming that a caption, once available, is something to consume.
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27
From Passive Response to Proactive Correction: Enhancing LLM Robustness Against Input Fact Perturbations
The paper introduces DEDUCE, a three‑stage framework that turns large language models into proactive error correctors by detecting input fact errors, devising correction strategies, and delivering reliable answers. It also presents MisFactQA, a dataset of factual errors, and new metrics for robustness evaluation. Experiments on TruthfulQA, FalseQA, and MisFactQA show significant gains in accuracy and error correction across Qwen, LLaMA, and Gemma models.
arXiv AI
Sep 17
Abstention vs. Hallucination: Benchmarking LLM Source Attribution for Scientific Citations
The paper introduces REASONS, a benchmark comprising 12,723 sentence-level citation instances across 12 arXiv subject categories, to evaluate scientific citation attribution by large language models. It proposes a dual-metric framework—Abstention Rate (AR) and Hallucination Rate (HR)—to assess the trade-off between reliability and responsiveness. Experiments on proprietary and open-source LLMs under various prompting and retrieval settings show that advanced Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) reduces hallucinations but may increase abstention, while retrieval-augmented variants often maintain near-zero abstention. Human evaluation reveals a high ratio of factual hallucinations to acceptable paraphrases, underscoring the need for systems that can appropriately abstain under uncertainty.