arXiv AI

Did the Model Use That? Counterfactual Training Boosts Self-Attribution in Language Models

The paper investigates whether language models can self‑attribute the influence of external information on their answers and proposes a counterfactual training method called CREDIT to improve this ability. Experiments show that most state‑of‑the‑art models rarely attribute influential information and often attribute non‑influential information, and that CREDIT significantly enhances attribution in several open models, outperforming other fine‑tuning and prompting approaches. CREDIT also distinguishes between answers that are genuinely changed by user suggestions and those that would have been given regardless, with some transfer to unseen information types and conflicting prompts.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 11

Probing for Knowledge Attribution in Large Language Models

The paper introduces a method for identifying the dominant knowledge source behind large language model (LLM) outputs, distinguishing between faithfulness violations (misuse of provided context) and factuality violations (errors in internal knowledge). A simple linear probe trained on hidden representations can reliably classify this source, and the authors present AttriWiki, a self‑supervised pipeline that generates labeled training data by prompting models to recall withheld entities or read them from context. Probes trained on AttriWiki achieve high Macro‑F1 scores across several models and datasets, generalize zero‑shot to a benchmark, and show that attribution mismatches can increase error rates by up to 70%. "whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that knowing the source of an LLM’s answer is crucial for effective mitigation of hallucinations, as attribution mismatches significantly raise error rates."

By Ivo Brink, Alexander Boer, Dennis Ulmer
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16

An Empirical Study of Counterfactual Self-Explanations in LLMs

The paper investigates counterfactual self‑explanations in large language models, where a model edits an input minimally to change its own prediction. Experiments on sentiment analysis and natural language inference with ten instruction‑tuned models from the LLaMA‑3 and Qwen‑2.5 families show that larger models produce more faithful, minimal, and human‑aligned counterfactuals. While rationale‑guided prompts improve minimality and alignment, they do not consistently enhance faithfulness, indicating that explanation quality depends heavily on model capacity and requires empirical validation.

By Giannis Kalyvas, Giorgos Filandrianos, Orfeas Menis Mastromichalakis, Vassilis Lyberatos, Giorgos Stamou
arXiv AI
Jul 3

MultAttnAttrib: Training-Free Multimodal Attribution in Long Document Question Answering

arXiv:2607. 01420v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As grounded QA systems are increasingly deployed in AI assistants, accurately attributing generated answers to evidence is critical for user trust and model safety.

By Dang Quang Thien Tran, Quang V. Dang, Vinamra Tyagi, Sai Soorya Rao Veeravalli, Trang Nguyen, Ryan A. Rossi, Franck Dernoncourt, Nedim Lipka, Koustava Goswami, Samyadeep Basu
arXiv AI
Oct 5

MEA: A Reward-Driven Multi-Agent System for Faithful Model Explanations

MEA is a multi‑agent framework that automates the selection and configuration of explanation tools for machine learning models across tabular, text, and vision data. A Proposer agent chooses appropriate tools based on the question and modality, while an Actor agent is trained end‑to‑end for faithfulness, producing natural‑language explanations. Experiments show that MEA outperforms existing post‑hoc explainers and closed‑source baselines, achieving significant faithfulness gains on six datasets.

By Yuyang Cheng, Raghav Kaushik Ravi, Srivarshinee Sridhar, Sriparna Saha, Akash Ghosh, Chirag Agarwal
arXiv AI
Jul 1

Self-Study Reconsidered: The Hidden Fragility of Learning from Self-Generated QA

arXiv:2606. 32002v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language models are increasingly taught from synthetic question--answer (QA) supervision: a model generates questions about a document, answers them from the same text, and the resulting pairs are used to fine-tune, distill, or compress knowledge into another model.

By Ekaterina Alimaskina, Denis Shveykin, Gleb Molodtsov, Igor Shalygin, Alexey Kadeishvili, Aleksandr Beznosikov