HIDE and Seek: Detecting Hallucinations in Language Models via Decoupled Representations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Contemporary Language Models (LMs), while impressively fluent, often generate content that is factually incorrect or unfaithful to the input context - a critical issue commonly referred to as 'hallucination'. This tendency of LMs to generate hallucinated content undermines their reliability, especially because these fabrications are often highly convincing and therefore difficult to detect. While several existing methods attempt to detect hallucinations, most rely on analyzing multiple generations per input, leading to increased computational cost and latency. To address this, we propose a single-pass, training-free approach for effective Hallucination detectIon via Decoupled rEpresentations (HIDE). Our approach leverages the hypothesis that hallucinations result from a statistical decoupling between an LM's internal representations of input context and its generated output. We quantify this decoupling using the Hilbert-Schmidt Independence Criterion (HSIC) applied to hidden-state representations extracted while generating the output sequence. We conduct extensive experiments on four diverse question answering datasets, evaluating both faithfulness and factuality hallucinations across six open-source LMs of varying scales and properties. Our results demonstrate that HIDE outperforms other single-pass methods in almost all settings, achieving an average relative improvement of ~29% in AUC-ROC over the best-performing single-pass strategy across various models and datasets. Additionally, HIDE shows competitive and often superior performance with multi-pass state-of-the-art methods, obtaining an average relative improvement of ~3% in AUC-ROC while consuming ~51% less computation time. Our findings highlight the effectiveness of exploiting internal representation decoupling in LMs for efficient and practical hallucination detection.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2025.
Builds on
43 of 67 references.
References · 43
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
- 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
- 2020Energy-based Out-of-distribution Detectioncited by 1,299
- 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,282
- 2018Hierarchical Neural Story Generationcited by 1,193
- 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 1,040
31 more
- 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 974
- 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
- 2017RACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinationscited by 861
- 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 734
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 714
- 2023Trusting Your Evidence: Hallucinate Less with Context-aware Decodingcited by 327
- 2024INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detectioncited by 323
- 2025Layer by Layer: Uncovering Hidden Representations in Language Modelscited by 311
- 2020FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 293
- 2020Data and its (dis)contents: A survey of dataset development and use in machine learning researchcited by 260
- 2023FacTool: Factuality Detection in Generative AI -- A Tool Augmented Framework for Multi-Task and Multi-Domain Scenarioscited by 251
- 2021QuestEval: Summarization Asks for Fact-based Evaluationcited by 244
- 2022RealTime QA: What's the Answer Right Now?cited by 244
- 2022Out-of-Distribution Detection and Selective Generation for Conditional Language Modelscited by 197
- 2023SelfCheck: Using LLMs to Zero-Shot Check Their Own Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 159
- 2017Breaking the Softmax Bottleneck: A High-Rank RNN Language Modelcited by 152
- 2022Scaling Laws and Interpretability of Learning from Repeated Datacited by 152
- 2020On Exposure Bias, Hallucination and Domain Shift in Neural Machine Translationcited by 127
- 2021Entity-level Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 118
- 2023Complex Claim Verification with Evidence Retrieved in the Wildcited by 110
- 2021Neural Path Hunter: Reducing Hallucination in Dialogue Systems via Path Groundingcited by 106
- 2024LLM Internal States Reveal Hallucination Risk Faced With a Querycited by 82
- 2023ChatGPT as a Factual Inconsistency Evaluator for Text Summarizationcited by 75
- 2023Exposing Attention Glitches with Flip-Flop Language Modelingcited by 75
- 2022Entity Cloze By Date: What LMs Know About Unseen Entitiescited by 55
- 2023Why Does ChatGPT Fall Short in Providing Truthful Answers?cited by 54
- 2024Do LLMs Know about Hallucination? An Empirical Investigation of LLM's Hidden Statescited by 52
- 2023LLMs as Factual Reasoners: Insights from Existing Benchmarks and Beyondcited by 38
- 2024AI Hallucinations: A Misnomer Worth Clarifyingcited by 34
- 2023BatGPT: A Bidirectional Autoregessive Talker from Generative Pre-trained Transformercited by 23
- 2023Retrieving Supporting Evidence for LLMs Generated Answerscited by 21
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.