# Hallucinate Less by Thinking More: Aspect-Based Causal Abstention for Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.17170 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.17170/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Hallucination detection and mitigation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 3 of its 64 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Nov 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Hallucination detection and mitigation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/hallucination-detection-and-mitigation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Know Your Limits: A Survey of Abstention in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.18418/) (2024)
- [To Believe or Not to Believe Your LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.02543/) (2024)
- [MKA: Leveraging Cross-Lingual Consensus for Model Abstention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.23687/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Detecting Hallucinations in Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Semantic-level Internal Reasoning Graph](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.03052/) (2026)
- [Twin Worlds: Equivariance-Based Abstention for Evidence-Grounded Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.28018/) (2026)
- [The Commit-Abstain Circuit: Why Language Models Hallucinate Instead of Abstaining](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32964/) (2026)
- [Risk-Controlled Selective LLM Answering by Pricing Label-Free Checks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.37493/) (2026)
- [Decouple to Forget: Semantic Mediation for Sensitive Unlearning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.17654/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) often produce fluent but factually incorrect responses, a phenomenon known as hallucination. Abstention, where the model chooses not to answer and instead outputs phrases such as "I don't know", is a common safeguard. However, existing abstention methods typically rely on post-generation signals, such as generation variations or feedback, which limits their ability to prevent unreliable responses in advance. In this paper, we introduce Aspect-Based Causal Abstention (ABCA), a new framework that enables early abstention by analysing the internal diversity of LLM knowledge through causal inference. This diversity reflects the multifaceted nature of parametric knowledge acquired from various sources, representing diverse aspects such as disciplines, legal contexts, or temporal frames. ABCA estimates causal effects conditioned on these aspects to assess the reliability of knowledge relevant to a given query. Based on these estimates, we enable two types of abstention: Type-1, where aspect effects are inconsistent (knowledge conflict), and Type-2, where aspect effects consistently support abstention (knowledge insufficiency). Experiments on standard benchmarks demonstrate that ABCA improves abstention reliability, achieves state-of-the-art performance, and enhances the interpretability of abstention decisions.