# Assessing Automated Fact-Checking for Medical LLM Responses with Knowledge Graphs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.12817 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.12817/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 34 of its 81 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Nov 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 34)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Open Graph Benchmark: Datasets for Machine Learning on Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00687/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.13138/) (2022)
- [From Local to Global: A Graph RAG Approach to Query-Focused Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16130/) (2024)
- [What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Exams](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.13081/) (2020)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [Capabilities of GPT-4 on Medical Challenge Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.13375/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.07641/) (2023)
- [FacTool: Factuality Detection in Generative AI -- A Tool Augmented Framework for Multi-Task and Multi-Domain Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13528/) (2023)
- [Adapted Large Language Models Can Outperform Medical Experts in Clinical Text Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07430/) (2023)
- [Capabilities of Gemini Models in Medicine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18416/) (2024)
- [PIXIU: A Large Language Model, Instruction Data and Evaluation Benchmark for Finance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05443/) (2023)
- [HuaTuo: Tuning LLaMA Model with Chinese Medical Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06975/) (2023)
- [Unsupervised Evaluation of Interactive Dialog with DialoGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.12719/) (2020)
- [Factuality Challenges in the Era of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05189/) (2023)
- [ACI-BENCH: a Novel Ambient Clinical Intelligence Dataset for Benchmarking Automatic Visit Note Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.02022/) (2023)
- [Extracting Accurate Materials Data from Research Papers with Conversational Language Models and Prompt Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.05352/) (2023)
- [BioRED: A Rich Biomedical Relation Extraction Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.04263/) (2022)
- [Improving Dialog Evaluation with a Multi-reference Adversarial Dataset and Large Scale Pretraining](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.11321/) (2020)
- [FactKG: Fact Verification via Reasoning on Knowledge Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06590/) (2023)
- [Summarizing, Simplifying, and Synthesizing Medical Evidence Using GPT-3 (with Varying Success)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06299/) (2023)
- [In Search of Needles in a 11M Haystack: Recurrent Memory Finds What LLMs Miss](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10790/) (2024)
- [HealthFC: Verifying Health Claims with Evidence-Based Medical Fact-Checking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.08503/) (2023)
- [CoVERT: A Corpus of Fact-checked Biomedical COVID-19 Tweets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.12164/) (2022)
- [Discriminative Predicate Path Mining for Fact Checking in Knowledge Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1510.05911/) (2015)
- [FactPICO: Factuality Evaluation for Plain Language Summarization of Medical Evidence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11456/) (2024)
- [Finding Streams in Knowledge Graphs to Support Fact Checking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1708.07239/) (2017)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The recent proliferation of large language models (LLMs) holds the potential to revolutionize healthcare, with strong capabilities in diverse medical tasks. Yet, deploying LLMs in high-stakes healthcare settings requires rigorous verification and validation to understand any potential harm. This paper investigates the reliability and viability of using medical knowledge graphs (KGs) for the automated factuality evaluation of LLM-generated responses. To ground this investigation, we introduce FAITH, a framework designed to systematically probe the strengths and limitations of this KG-based approach. FAITH operates without reference answers by decomposing responses into atomic claims, linking them to a medical KG, and scoring them based on evidence paths. Experiments on diverse medical tasks with human subjective evaluations demonstrate that KG-grounded evaluation achieves considerably higher correlations with clinician judgments and can effectively distinguish LLMs with varying capabilities. It is also robust to textual variances. The inherent explainability of its scoring can further help users understand and mitigate the limitations of current LLMs. We conclude that while limitations exist, leveraging KGs is a prominent direction for automated factuality assessment in healthcare.