# Can LLMs Write Faithfully? An Agent-Based Evaluation of LLM-generated Islamic Content

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.24438 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.24438/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 16 of its 40 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Oct 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Web, search, and research agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/web-search-and-research-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17760/) (2023)
- [On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00661/) (2020)
- [TyDi QA: A Benchmark for Information-Seeking Question Answering in Typologically Diverse Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.05002/) (2020)
- [AraBERT: Transformer-based Model for Arabic Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.00104/) (2020)
- [MLQA: Evaluating Cross-lingual Extractive Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.07475/) (2019)
- [Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20362/) (2024)
- [Large Legal Fictions: Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01301/) (2024)
- [ArabicMMLU: Assessing Massive Multitask Language Understanding in Arabic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12840/) (2024)
- [Fanar: An Arabic-Centric Multimodal Generative AI Platform](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.13944/) (2025)
- [Neural Arabic Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.05394/) (2019)
- [Shamela: A Large-Scale Historical Arabic Corpus](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.08989/) (2016)
- [From RAG to Agentic: Validating Islamic-Medicine Responses with LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.15911/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Fanar-Sadiq: A Multi-Agent Architecture for Grounded Islamic QA](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.08501/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models are increasingly used for Islamic guidance, but risk misquoting texts, misapplying jurisprudence, or producing culturally inconsistent responses. We pilot an evaluation of GPT-4o, Ansari AI, and Fanar on prompts from authentic Islamic blogs. Our dual-agent framework uses a quantitative agent for citation verification and six-dimensional scoring (e.g., Structure, Islamic Consistency, Citations) and a qualitative agent for five-dimensional side-by-side comparison (e.g., Tone, Depth, Originality). GPT-4o scored highest in Islamic Accuracy (3.93) and Citation (3.38), Ansari AI followed (3.68, 3.32), and Fanar lagged (2.76, 1.82). Despite relatively strong performance, models still fall short in reliably producing accurate Islamic content and citations -- a paramount requirement in faith-sensitive writing. GPT-4o had the highest mean quantitative score (3.90/5), while Ansari AI led qualitative pairwise wins (116/200). Fanar, though trailing, introduces innovations for Islamic and Arabic contexts. This study underscores the need for community-driven benchmarks centering Muslim perspectives, offering an early step toward more reliable AI in Islamic knowledge and other high-stakes domains such as medicine, law, and journalism.