Fine-Grained Detection of Context-Grounded Hallucinations Using LLMs
Abstract
A study evaluates the effectiveness of large language models in identifying context-grounded hallucinations using a newly constructed benchmark and free-form textual descriptions, revealing challenges in distinguishing between missing details and unverifiable information.
Context-grounded hallucinations are cases where model outputs contain information not verifiable against the source text. We study the applicability of LLMs for localizing such hallucinations, as a more practical alternative to existing complex evaluation pipelines. In the absence of established benchmarks for meta-evaluation of hallucinations localization, we construct one tailored to LLMs, involving a challenging human annotation of over 1,000 examples. We complement the benchmark with an LLM-based evaluation protocol, verifying its quality in a human evaluation. Since existing representations of hallucinations limit the types of errors that can be expressed, we propose a new representation based on free-form textual descriptions, capturing the full range of possible errors. We conduct a comprehensive study, evaluating four large-scale LLMs, which highlights the benchmark's difficulty, as the best model achieves an F1 score of only 0.67. Through careful analysis, we offer insights into optimal prompting strategies for the task and identify the main factors that make it challenging for LLMs: (1) a tendency to incorrectly flag missing details as inconsistent, despite being instructed to check only facts in the output; and (2) difficulty with outputs containing factually correct information absent from the source - and thus not verifiable - due to alignment with the model's parametric knowledge.
Community
Context-grounded hallucinations are cases where model outputs contain information not verifiable against the source text. We study the applicability of LLMs for localizing such hallucinations, as a more practical alternative to existing complex evaluation pipelines. In the absence of established benchmarks for meta-evaluation of hallucinations localization, we construct one tailored to LLMs, involving a challenging human annotation of over 1,000 examples. We complement the benchmark with an LLM-based evaluation protocol, verifying its quality in a human evaluation. Since existing representations of hallucinations limit the types of errors that can be expressed, we propose a new representation based on free-form textual descriptions, capturing the full range of possible errors. We conduct a comprehensive study, evaluating four large-scale LLMs, which highlights the benchmark's difficulty, as the best model achieves an F1 score of only 0.67. Through careful analysis, we offer insights into optimal prompting strategies for the task and identify the main factors that make it challenging for LLMs: (1) a tendency to incorrectly flag missing details as inconsistent, despite being instructed to check only facts in the output; and (2) difficulty with outputs containing factually correct information absent from the source - and thus not verifiable - due to alignment with the model's parametric knowledge.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- PerHalluEval: Persian Hallucination Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Models (2025)
- FineDialFact: A benchmark for Fine-grained Dialogue Fact Verification (2025)
- Zero-knowledge LLM hallucination detection and mitigation through fine-grained cross-model consistency (2025)
- Learning to Reason for Hallucination Span Detection (2025)
- ChartHal: A Fine-grained Framework Evaluating Hallucination of Large Vision Language Models in Chart Understanding (2025)
- KnowDR-REC: A Benchmark for Referring Expression Comprehension with Real-World Knowledge (2025)
- Self-Consistency as a Free Lunch: Reducing Hallucinations in Vision-Language Models via Self-Reflection (2025)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment:
@librarian-bot
recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper