mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Can a Hallucinating Model help in Reducing Human "Hallucination"?

arXiv 2405.00843 ↗First posted 1 May 2024cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The prevalence of unwarranted beliefs, spanning pseudoscience, logical fallacies, and conspiracy theories, presents substantial societal hurdles and the risk of disseminating misinformation. Utilizing established psychometric assessments, this study explores the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) vis-a-vis the average human in detecting prevalent logical pitfalls. We undertake a philosophical inquiry, juxtaposing the rationality of humans against that of LLMs. Furthermore, we propose methodologies for harnessing LLMs to counter misconceptions, drawing upon psychological models of persuasion such as cognitive dissonance theory and elaboration likelihood theory. Through this endeavor, we highlight the potential of LLMs as personalized misinformation debunking agents.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 May 2024.

Builds on

7 of 36 references.

References · 7

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  2. 2023Evaluating the Logical Reasoning Ability of ChatGPT and GPT-4cited by 202
  3. 2023Benchmarking Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models as Evaluatorscited by 150
  4. 2022Logical Fallacy Detectioncited by 25
  5. 2023How susceptible are LLMs to Logical Fallacies?cited by 23
  6. 2024When LLMs Meet Cunning Texts: A Fallacy Understanding Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 22
  7. 2023Creating a Large Language Model of a Philosophercited by 21

Built on by

Not cited yet.