mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Quantifying and Attributing the Hallucination of Large Language Models via Association Analysis

arXiv 2309.05217 ↗First posted 11 Sep 2023cs.AI cs.CLcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Although demonstrating superb performance on various NLP tasks, large language models (LLMs) still suffer from the hallucination problem, which threatens the reliability of LLMs. To measure the level of hallucination of LLMs, previous works first categorize the hallucination according to the phenomenon similarity, then quantify the proportion that model outputs contain hallucinatory contents. However, such hallucination rates could easily be distorted by confounders. Moreover, such hallucination rates could not reflect the reasons for the hallucination, as similar hallucinatory phenomena may originate from different sources. To address these issues, we propose to combine the hallucination level quantification and hallucination reason investigation through an association analysis, which builds the relationship between the hallucination rate of LLMs with a set of risk factors. In this way, we are able to observe the hallucination level under each value of each risk factor, examining the contribution and statistical significance of each risk factor, meanwhile excluding the confounding effect of other factors. Additionally, by recognizing the risk factors according to a taxonomy of model capability, we reveal a set of potential deficiencies in commonsense memorization, relational reasoning, and instruction following, which may further provide guidance for the pretraining and supervised fine-tuning process of LLMs to mitigate the hallucination.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Sep 2023.

Builds on

30 of 41 references.

References · 30

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  4. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
  5. 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,895
  6. 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
  7. 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,537
  8. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
  9. 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,718
  10. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,538
  11. 2023PaLM 2 Technical Reportcited by 1,154
  12. 2023A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivitycited by 888
18 more
  1. 2019Are Transformers universal approximators of sequence-to-sequence functions?cited by 404
  2. 2021Understanding Factuality in Abstractive Summarization with FRANK: A Benchmark for Factuality Metricscited by 285
  3. 2019Don't Take the Easy Way Out: Ensemble Based Methods for Avoiding Known Dataset Biasescited by 279
  4. 2022Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language Modelscited by 218
  5. 2023Inverse Scaling: When Bigger Isn't Bettercited by 205
  6. 2023Sources of Hallucination by Large Language Models on Inference Taskscited by 168
  7. 2023Can ChatGPT Understand Too? A Comparative Study on ChatGPT and Fine-tuned BERTcited by 155
  8. 2021Inductive Biases and Variable Creation in Self-Attention Mechanismscited by 144
  9. 2021Hallucinated but Factual! Inspecting the Factuality of Hallucinations in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 128
  10. 2023Do Language Models Know When They're Hallucinating References?cited by 115
  11. 2022Language Models that Seek for Knowledge: Modular Search & Generation for Dialogue and Prompt Completioncited by 102
  12. 2022Capturing Failures of Large Language Models via Human Cognitive Biasescited by 97
  13. 2020Controlled Hallucinations: Learning to Generate Faithfully from Noisy Datacited by 83
  14. 2023Why Does ChatGPT Fall Short in Providing Truthful Answers?cited by 54
  15. 2020Learning to Explain: Datasets and Models for Identifying Valid Reasoning Chains in Multihop Question-Answeringcited by 49
  16. 2020A Gold Standard Methodology for Evaluating Accuracy in Data-To-Text Systemscited by 34
  17. 2021Pushing the Limits of Rule Reasoning in Transformers through Natural Language Satisfiabilitycited by 18
  18. 2020Improving QA Generalization by Concurrent Modeling of Multiple Biasescited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 6; 2025: 5; 2026: 1.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area: