The Detectability Gap: Hidden Heterogeneity in Hallucination Detection Across Language Models
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2606. 07537v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models hallucinate--producing fluent, confident, factually wrong outputs--with a consistency that persists across generations and scales.
arXiv:2607. 04223v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) reduces but does not eliminate hallucination, and existing detectors return a single answer-level score that does not indicate which sentence is unsupported, or why.
arXiv:2609. 16933v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern predictive systems expose multiple quantities that are commonly interpreted as measures of confidence.
arXiv:2603. 09986v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Hallucinations, the tendency for large language models to provide responses with factually incorrect and unsupported claims, is a serious problem within natural language processing for which we do not yet have an effective solution to mitigate against.
The paper presents the first systematic reliability evaluation of diffusion-based Large Vision‑Language Models (dLVLMs), comparing six diffusion models to autoregressive (AR) baselines across four dimensions. Key findings include a reversal of the yes‑bias seen in AR models for binary visual queries, competitive hallucination rates but lower linguistic quality, near‑zero accuracy for underrepresented racial groups with opposite‑polarity gender bias, and accuracy collapse in multiple‑choice tasks when the correct option is shorter than distractors due to a length prior emerging at the first denoising step. Additionally, tokens committed late in denoising with low confidence correlate with hallucinated content, indicating a unique mechanistic signal in diffusion generation.
When a tool-using agent is given the same task in a different language, does it still take the same steps? Multilingual evaluation rarely asks: it compares final answers and discards the actions.