arXiv:2608. 05228v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The "decompose-then-verify" paradigm for LLM factuality evaluation faces a fundamental trade-off: atomic facts, i.
By Jin Liu, Steffen Thoma, Achim Rettinger
Large Language Models (LLMs) generate fluent long-form text, however, often add unsupported factual claims. Existing verification techniques improve factuality by grounding generation in external evidence.
FaithSieve is a Lean‑assisted framework that fine‑grains natural‑language mathematical proofs into local reasoning units, extracts typed proof obligations, and verifies them with formal evidence gated by semantic alignment. It introduces two expert‑verified datasets—ProofLoc‑Olympiad and ProofLoc‑University—to benchmark first‑error localization. On these benchmarks, FaithSieve outperforms direct‑judging baselines, achieving 81.43% and 84.5% exact first‑error accuracy respectively.
By Ziyu Wang, Qiming Dai, Yishan Wu, Zaiwen Wen
arXiv:2602.02377v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: While large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on mathematical problems with verifiable answers, many advanced problems are pr...
By Haotong Yang, Zitong Wang, Shijia Kang, Siqi Yang, Wenkai Yu, Xu Niu, Yike Sun, Yi Hu, Zhouchen Lin, Muhan Zhang
The paper introduces CAMS, a Claim‑Anchored Multi‑Document Summarization framework that decomposes source documents into atomic claims, resolves provenance deterministically from verbatim quotes to token spans, clusters equivalent claims across documents, and rewrites summaries so each sentence ends with claim identifiers linking back to source spans. CAMS separates provenance (an invariant for each emitted sentence) from faithfulness (an objective encouraged by selection, rewriting, and verification). Evaluations on MultiNews, DiverseSumm, and zero‑shot WCEP show that CAMS matches strong baselines in summary quality while improving faithfulness and citation precision, raising attribution accuracy from 38% to 64% and reducing human verification time per claim by 3.4×.
By Shuo Guan
The paper introduces Fact-Ablated Evaluation (FAE), a framework that iteratively removes cited evidence to test whether large language models (LLMs) adjust their fact‑checking predictions accordingly. Experiments reveal that many off‑the‑shelf LLMs rely more on internal knowledge than on the provided evidence. To address this, the authors propose REAL, a training method that uses counterfactual evidence supervision to encourage LLMs to base veracity judgments on evidence, achieving better evidence‑dependent performance across four datasets.
By Xingyu Deng, Mingzi Cao, Nikolaos Aletras, Xi Wang, Mark Stevenson