A Geometric Taxonomy of Hallucinations in LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Hallucinations in deployed language models can have real consequences for downstream decisions in domains such as healthcare, legal, and financial services. In production, detection has to run on what the deployed system can see: the query, the response, and often a source document. White-box access to model internals and multi-sample querying are not generally available behind a third-party API. Within this setting - black-box, single-pass, only question/answer available - the dominant baseline is NLI, which returns a value but no diagnosis when it fails. We argue that operating directly on the geometry of the embedding space provides detection methods whose successes and failures are interpretable as structural properties of contrastive sentence-encoder training citepwang2020understanding. The contribution is: given an operationally-motivated taxonomy, geometry predicts which types of hallucination are detectable and which are not - and the predictions hold. We propose three operational types organized by the relation of the response embedding to the plausibility region of grounded responses on the unit hypersphere, and derive from the alignment objective a prediction for each: (1)query-proximate unfaithfulness is detectable by an angular ratio; (2)confabulation outside the plausibility region produces a directional signature that outperforms NLI on expert-annotated error; (3)factual errors sharing vocabulary and frame with correct answers are not separable by angular geometry. To validate on content resembling deployment, we built a 212-pair human-confabulated dataset across nine domains using provoked confabulation.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 41 of its 64 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jan 2026.
Builds on
41 of 64 references.
References · 41
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,181
- 2021SimCSE: Simple Contrastive Learning of Sentence Embeddingscited by 2,173
- 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,075
- 2023A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questionscited by 1,601
- 2020Understanding Contrastive Representation Learning through Alignment and Uniformity on the Hyperspherecited by 1,405
- 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,282
- 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
29 more
- 2023Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generationcited by 819
- 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
- 2019How Contextual are Contextualized Word Representations? Comparing the Geometry of BERT, ELMo, and GPT-2 Embeddingscited by 784
- 2023Towards General Text Embeddings with Multi-stage Contrastive Learningcited by 723
- 2023Siren's Song in the AI Ocean: A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Modelscited by 698
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 659
- 2019Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 584
- 2023C-Pack: Packed Resources For General Chinese Embeddingscited by 578
- 2021Sentence-T5: Scalable Sentence Encoders from Pre-trained Text-to-Text Modelscited by 463
- 2021SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarizationcited by 407
- 2023HaluEval: A Large-Scale Hallucination Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 341
- 2024INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detectioncited by 323
- 2023AlignScore: Evaluating Factual Consistency with a Unified Alignment Functioncited by 288
- 2023RAGTruth: A Hallucination Corpus for Developing Trustworthy Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 283
- 2021QAFactEval: Improved QA-Based Factual Consistency Evaluation for Summarizationcited by 236
- 2025Why Language Models Hallucinatecited by 220
- 2025Emergent Misalignment: Narrow finetuning can produce broadly misaligned LLMscited by 172
- 2021The Curious Case of Hallucinations in Neural Machine Translationcited by 161
- 2023ExpertQA: Expert-Curated Questions and Attributed Answerscited by 97
- 2025HalluLens: LLM Hallucination Benchmarkcited by 92
- 2025Convergent Linear Representations of Emergent Misalignmentcited by 71
- 2023FELM: Benchmarking Factuality Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 66
- 2024Lynx: An Open Source Hallucination Evaluation Modelcited by 57
- 2025Large Language Models Hallucination: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 49
- 2025LettuceDetect: A Hallucination Detection Framework for RAG Applicationscited by 34
- 2024FaithBench: A Diverse Hallucination Benchmark for Summarization by Modern LLMscited by 24
- 2024Uncertainty Quantification in Large Language Models Through Convex Hull Analysiscited by 13
- 2025Geometric Uncertainty for Detecting and Correcting Hallucinations in LLMscited by 13
- 2025The Geometry of Truth: Layer-wise Semantic Dynamics for Hallucination Detection in Large Language Modelscited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.