Shaking to Reveal: Perturbation-Based Detection of LLM Hallucinations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Hallucination remains a key obstacle to the reliable deployment of large language models (LLMs) in real-world question answering tasks. A widely adopted strategy to detect hallucination, known as self-assessment, relies on the model's own output confidence to estimate the factual accuracy of its answers. However, this strategy assumes that the model's output distribution closely reflects the true data distribution, which may not always hold in practice. As bias accumulates through the model's layers, the final output can diverge from the underlying reasoning process, making output-level confidence an unreliable signal for hallucination detection. In this work, we propose Sample-Specific Prompting (SSP), a new framework that improves self-assessment by analyzing perturbation sensitivity at intermediate representations. These representations, being less influenced by model bias, offer a more faithful view of the model's latent reasoning process. Specifically, SSP dynamically generates noise prompts for each input and employs a lightweight encoder to amplify the changes in representations caused by the perturbation. A contrastive distance metric is then used to quantify these differences and separate truthful from hallucinated responses. By leveraging the dynamic behavior of intermediate representations under perturbation, SSP enables more reliable self-assessment. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SSP significantly outperforms prior methods across a range of hallucination detection benchmarks.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 64 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jun 2025.
Builds on
64 of 78 references.
References · 64
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 12,049
- 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,513
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,915
- 2021The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuningcited by 3,795
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
38 more
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,075
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
- 2022Visual Prompt Tuningcited by 1,681
- 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,302
- 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,282
- 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
- 2023Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generationcited by 819
- 2020A Primer in BERTology: What we know about how BERT workscited by 815
- 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 812
- 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
- 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 767
- 2022Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Wordscited by 751
- 2019Universal Adversarial Triggers for Attacking and Analyzing NLPcited by 722
- 2023The Geometry of Truth: Emergent Linear Structure in Large Language Model Representations of True/False Datasetscited by 712
- 2021P-Tuning v2: Prompt Tuning Can Be Comparable to Fine-tuning Universally Across Scales and Taskscited by 689
- 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 683
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 659
- 2024DeepSeek LLM: Scaling Open-Source Language Models with Longtermismcited by 642
- 2020TyDi QA: A Benchmark for Information-Seeking Question Answering in Typologically Diverse Languagescited by 488
- 2020How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answeringcited by 445
- 2024A Survey on Hallucination in Large Vision-Language Modelscited by 357
- 2024Hallucination is Inevitable: An Innate Limitation of Large Language Modelscited by 332
- 2024INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detectioncited by 323
- 2023Generating with Confidence: Uncertainty Quantification for Black-box Large Language Modelscited by 293
- 2023AlignScore: Evaluating Factual Consistency with a Unified Alignment Functioncited by 288
- 2023FacTool: Factuality Detection in Generative AI -- A Tool Augmented Framework for Multi-Task and Multi-Domain Scenarioscited by 251
- 2021Gradient-based Adversarial Attacks against Text Transformerscited by 234
- 2022Out-of-Distribution Detection and Selective Generation for Conditional Language Modelscited by 197
- 2016Deep Information Propagationcited by 195
- 2023LM vs LM: Detecting Factual Errors via Cross Examinationcited by 156
- 2024Lookback Lens: Detecting and Mitigating Contextual Hallucinations in Large Language Models Using Only Attention Mapscited by 142
- 2023Self-contradictory Hallucinations of Large Language Models: Evaluation, Detection and Mitigationcited by 124
- 2023Do Language Models Know When They're Hallucinating References?cited by 116
- 2018Identifying and Controlling Important Neurons in Neural Machine Translationcited by 111
- 2023Enhancing Uncertainty-Based Hallucination Detection with Stronger Focuscited by 99
- 2024HaloScope: Harnessing Unlabeled LLM Generations for Hallucination Detectioncited by 99
- 2023Navigating the Grey Area: How Expressions of Uncertainty and Overconfidence Affect Language Modelscited by 91
50 most cited of 64 All 64 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Logical Consistency as a Bridge: Improving LLM Hallucination Detection via Label Constraint Modeling between Responses and Self-Judgments
- 2023SAC3: Reliable Hallucination Detection in Black-Box Language Models via Semantic-aware Cross-check Consistency
- 2025Learned Hallucination Detection in Black-Box LLMs using Token-level Entropy Production Rate
- 2025SelfCheck-Eval: A Multi-Module Framework for Zero-Resource Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models
- 2026Detecting Hallucinations in Retrieval-Augmented Generation through Grounding-Aware Sensitivity by Perturbation (GASP)
- 2025HalluField: Detecting LLM Hallucinations via Field-Theoretic Modeling
- 2025Joint Evaluation of Answer and Reasoning Consistency for Hallucination Detection in Large Reasoning Models
- 2026Prompt Embedding Probes (PEP): Hallucination Detection in LLMs from Hidden States