The paper introduces Evidence-Aligned Entity Verification (EAEV), a method for detecting entity-level hallucinations in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). EAEV aligns generated entities with retrieved evidence across three dimensions and uses counterfactual stability analysis to maintain robust alignments when evidence changes. Experiments on multiple RAG benchmarks show that EAEV consistently outperforms existing hallucination detection methods and generalizes well.
By Runsong Jia, Zhen Fang, Mengjia Wu, Jie Lu, Yi Zhang
arXiv:2607. 10476v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as a powerful tool for retrieving knowledge through seamless, human-like interactions.
By Basel Abdeen, S M Tahmid Siddiqui, Meah Tahmeed Ahmed, Anoop Singhal, Latifur Khan, Punya Parag Modi, Ehab Al-Shaer
arXiv:2602.11166v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) methods are widely used to adapt large language models (LLMs) to downstream tasks and are often assume...
By Xu Hu, Yifan Zhang, Songtao Wei, Chen Zhao, Qiannan Li, Bingzhe Li, Feng Chen
arXiv:2606. 07528v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Hallucination in large language models (LLMs), defined as the generation of factually incorrect or unsupported content, remains a critical barrier to reliable deployment.
By Naveen Bera, Pulijala Sai Nikhila, Kondaguduru Abhiram, Shaik Gayaz Ali, Shoaib Sadiq Salehmohamed, Shaik Mohammed Omar, Jinal Prashant Thakkar, Hansika Aredla, Shalmali Ayachit
arXiv:2606. 03628v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in open-ended text generation, yet they remain prone to hallucinating incorrect or unsupported content, which undermines their reliability.
By Lin Li, Georgia Channing, Suhaas M Bhat, Gabriel Davis Jones, Yarin Gal
arXiv:2606. 00301v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) arise from heterogeneous failure mechanisms, making reliable detection difficult for any single global uncertainty score.
By Wentao Ye, Liyao Li, Zhiqing Xiao, Muzhi Zhu, Jiaqi Hu, Zhanming Shen, Xiaomeng Hu, Sean Du, Haobo Wang
The paper explores using a language model’s low‑level symbolic skill—specifically SQL—to detect hallucinations without fine‑tuning. By having the model construct an SQL database from reference documents, it can reason over both the source and the model’s output, creating a neurosymbolic check. Experiments on RAGTruth and DiaHalu show this method outperforms direct prediction and rivals state‑of‑the‑art detectors, highlighting the value of leveraging inherent symbolic competences in LLMs.
By Renato Vukovic, Hsien-chin Lin, Carel van Niekerk, Benjamin Ruppik, Michael Heck, Shutong Feng, Nurul Lubis, Milica Gasic
arXiv:2608. 16353v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Even well-aligned large language models confidently generate factually incorrect text, making hallucination a persistent reliability risk in high-stakes deployments.
By Zhihao Guo, Zonghan Wu, Huan Huo, DaYong Ye, Junwei Zhang, Weiran Yao, Zhiwei Liu, Qingsong Wen, Yilei Shao
The paper presents a geometric framework for quantifying uncertainty in large language models (LLMs) at both the prompt and answer levels. By modeling a prompt-conditioned semantic distribution in answer embedding space and using archetypal analysis on multiple sampled answers, the method estimates distribution entropy for prompt-level uncertainty and atypicality for individual answer reliability. Experiments demonstrate comparable or superior performance to existing techniques on short-form QA datasets and notably better results on medical datasets where hallucinations pose critical risks.
By Edward Phillips, Sean Wu, Soheila Molaei, Danielle Belgrave, Anshul Thakur, David Clifton
arXiv:2607. 07507v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Hallucinations in vision language models (VLMs) are commonly treated as semantic errors, yet they often arise from partial or ambiguous visual evidence.
By Feng He, Zhenting Wang, Qifan Wang, Qiang Guan, Dongfang Liu, Ruixiang Tang, Qiankun Li
GRACE is a step‑level benchmark for evaluating the faithfulness of chain‑of‑thought reasoning over context. It provides human annotations for each step in CoT traces from 10 models across 4 datasets, labeling faithfulness, error category, and natural‑language explanations. The benchmark introduces a data‑driven taxonomy that splits errors into GRACE‑Inference (deductive) and GRACE‑Grounding (factual) tracks, each with four categories, and demonstrates that incorporating step‑level faithfulness signals can improve downstream accuracy and reasoning reliability.
By Hoang Pham, Dong Le, Anh Tuan Luu
arXiv:2601.19918v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs), i.e., plausible but non-factual generations, pose a significant challenge to reliable deployment in...
By Yitong Qiao, Licheng Pan, Yu Mi, Lei Liu, Yue Shen, Jian Wang, Jinjie Gu, Fei Sun, Zhixuan Chu