The paper audits a 366‑day autobiographical book generated by a large language model (LLM) against an independent verification corpus. Using a four‑level rubric, 354 of the 366 days (96.7%) failed verification, with only 12 days containing corroborated scenes and 19 days containing actively contradicted claims. Regenerating the same days with current models yielded 100% verification failure, while grounding the generation in the subject’s own corpus improved the rate to 83.3% but still left substantial residual failure.
By Heather Renze
arXiv:2609.09243v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds a language model in retrieved documents, which reduces hallucination but creates a new attack surface: i...
By Iliano Fasolino
arXiv:2609.06147v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Ask a language model the same question about the same document twenty times, and it sometimes returns two different answers. We built Probity, a benc...
By Seyed Mosayeb Alam
arXiv:2608. 10216v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent frameworks ship quality gates that compare text blocks by embedding-cosine similarity and decide at a fixed cutoff.
By Scott E. Frias
arXiv:2608.29307v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Language models increasingly answer questions by consulting retrieved documents rather than memory alone, a design now common in search assistants an...
By Sai Krishna Reddy Mulakkayala, Niki van Stein, Aske Plaat
arXiv:2609.11261v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Five decades of litigation have disgorged hundreds of millions of pages of formerly secret business records from the tobacco industry, along with doc...
By Daniel Akselrad, Robert N. Proctor