mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SCOPE: A Self-supervised Framework for Improving Faithfulness in Conditional Text Generation

arXiv 2502.13674 ↗First posted 19 Feb 2025cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs), when used for conditional text generation, often produce hallucinations, i.e., information that is unfaithful or not grounded in the input context. This issue arises in typical conditional text generation tasks, such as text summarization and data-to-text generation, where the goal is to produce fluent text based on contextual input. When fine-tuned on specific domains, LLMs struggle to provide faithful answers to a given context, often adding information or generating errors. One underlying cause of this issue is that LLMs rely on statistical patterns learned from their training data. This reliance can interfere with the model's ability to stay faithful to a provided context, leading to the generation of ungrounded information. We build upon this observation and introduce a novel self-supervised method for generating a training set of unfaithful samples. We then refine the model using a training process that encourages the generation of grounded outputs over unfaithful ones, drawing on preference-based training. Our approach leads to significantly more grounded text generation, outperforming existing self-supervised techniques in faithfulness, as evaluated through automatic metrics, LLM-based assessments, and human evaluations.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 42 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2025.

Builds on

42 of 56 references.

References · 42

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  5. 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,935
  6. 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,150
  7. 2018A Call for Clarity in Reporting BLEU Scorescited by 1,799
  8. 2023A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questionscited by 1,601
  9. 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,317
  10. 2021DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharingcited by 1,254
  11. 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
  12. 2023ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Taskscited by 870
30 more
  1. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 734
  2. 2020SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluationcited by 674
  3. 2019Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 584
  4. 2024ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Modelcited by 562
  5. 2019SAMSum Corpus: A Human-annotated Dialogue Dataset for Abstractive Summarizationcited by 535
  6. 2022News Summarization and Evaluation in the Era of GPT-3cited by 327
  7. 2023Trusting Your Evidence: Hallucinate Less with Context-aware Decodingcited by 327
  8. 2023AlignScore: Evaluating Factual Consistency with a Unified Alignment Functioncited by 288
  9. 2020ToTTo: A Controlled Table-To-Text Generation Datasetcited by 268
  10. 2024Direct Language Model Alignment from Online AI Feedbackcited by 260
  11. 2021QuestEval: Summarization Asks for Fact-based Evaluationcited by 244
  12. 2019Neural Text Summarization: A Critical Evaluationcited by 189
  13. 2021FeTaQA: Free-form Table Question Answeringcited by 175
  14. 2022BRIO: Bringing Order to Abstractive Summarizationcited by 161
  15. 2021Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarizationcited by 131
  16. 2022Calibrating Sequence likelihood Improves Conditional Language Generationcited by 121
  17. 2021CLIFF: Contrastive Learning for Improving Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 120
  18. 2021Entity-level Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 118
  19. 2020GO FIGURE: A Meta Evaluation of Factuality in Summarizationcited by 76
  20. 2022Mutual Information Alleviates Hallucinations in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 68
  21. 2019Semantic Noise Matters for Neural Natural Language Generationcited by 64
  22. 2019Sticking to the Facts: Confident Decoding for Faithful Data-to-Text Generationcited by 62
  23. 2020Evaluating Semantic Accuracy of Data-to-Text Generation with Natural Language Inferencecited by 43
  24. 2021Controlling Hallucinations at Word Level in Data-to-Text Generationcited by 41
  25. 2020A Gold Standard Methodology for Evaluating Accuracy in Data-To-Text Systemscited by 34
  26. 2022Towards Improving Faithfulness in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 27
  27. 2021Data-QuestEval: A Referenceless Metric for Data-to-Text Semantic Evaluationcited by 21
  28. 2022Improving the Faithfulness of Abstractive Summarization via Entity Coverage Controlcited by 21
  29. 2023Critic-Driven Decoding for Mitigating Hallucinations in Data-to-text Generationcited by 7
  30. 2023Calibrating Likelihoods towards Consistency in Summarization Modelscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 2.

5 papers.