# Detecting Errors through Ensembling Prompts (DEEP): An End-to-End LLM Framework for Detecting Factual Errors

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.13009 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.13009/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 23 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13063/) (2023)
- [Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14975/) (2023)
- [Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Words](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14334/) (2022)
- [Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.12840/) (2019)
- [How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.00955/) (2020)
- [Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.04048/) (2023)
- [SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09525/) (2021)
- [Revisiting the Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.07998/) (2021)
- [Snorkel: Rapid Training Data Creation with Weak Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.10160/) (2017)
- [Data Programming: Creating Large Training Sets, Quickly](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1605.07723/) (2016)
- [QAFactEval: Improved QA-Based Factual Consistency Evaluation for Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.08542/) (2021)
- [Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.04302/) (2021)
- [Training Complex Models with Multi-Task Weak Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.02840/) (2018)
- [MediaSum: A Large-scale Media Interview Dataset for Dialogue Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.06410/) (2021)
- [Understanding Factual Errors in Summarization: Errors, Summarizers, Datasets, Error Detectors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.12854/) (2022)
- [Fast and Three-rious: Speeding Up Weak Supervision with Triplet Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.11955/) (2020)
- [WRENCH: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Weak Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.11377/) (2021)
- [MeetingBank: A Benchmark Dataset for Meeting Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17529/) (2023)
- [ChatGPT as a Factual Inconsistency Evaluator for Text Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15621/) (2023)
- [TofuEval: Evaluating Hallucinations of LLMs on Topic-Focused Dialogue Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13249/) (2024)
- [Learning to Evaluate Image Captioning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.06422/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Entropy and Attention Dynamics in Small Language Models: A Trace-Level Structural Analysis on the TruthfulQA Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.03589/) (2026)
- [The Safeguard Worked. Is the LLM System Safer?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.00519/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Accurate text summarization is one of the most common and important tasks performed by Large Language Models, where the costs of human review for an entire document may be high, but the costs of errors in summarization may be even greater. We propose Detecting Errors through Ensembling Prompts (DEEP) - an end-to-end large language model framework for detecting factual errors in text summarization. Our framework uses a diverse set of LLM prompts to identify factual inconsistencies, treating their outputs as binary features, which are then fed into ensembling models. We then calibrate the ensembled models to produce empirically accurate probabilities that a text is factually consistent or free of hallucination. We demonstrate that prior models for detecting factual errors in summaries perform significantly worse without optimizing the thresholds on subsets of the evaluated dataset. Our framework achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) balanced accuracy on the AggreFact-XSUM FTSOTA, TofuEval Summary-Level, and HaluEval Summarization benchmarks in detecting factual errors within transformer-generated text summaries. It does so without any fine-tuning of the language model or reliance on thresholding techniques not available in practical settings.