# Sample Transform Cost-Based Training-Free Hallucination Detector for Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.22303 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.22303/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 27 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Mar 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 27 of 27)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.02142/) (2015)
- [SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.05250/) (2016)
- [Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensembles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.01474/) (2016)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.04977/) (2017)
- [Sinkhorn Distances: Lightspeed Computation of Optimal Transportation Distances](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1306.0895/) (2013)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03629/) (2022)
- [Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.05221/) (2022)
- [A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.05232/) (2023)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehend](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.03340/) (2015)
- [On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00661/) (2020)
- [Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.09664/) (2023)
- [Abstractive Text Summarization Using Sequence-to-Sequence RNNs and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.06023/) (2016)
- [SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08896/) (2023)
- [CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.07042/) (2018)
- [Neural Text Generation with Unlikelihood Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.04319/) (2019)
- [INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03744/) (2024)
- [RARR: Researching and Revising What Language Models Say, Using Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.08726/) (2022)
- [Revisiting Hallucination Detection with Effective Rank-based Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.08389/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) remain a central obstacle to trustworthy deployment, motivating detectors that are accurate, lightweight, and broadly applicable. Since an LLM with a prompt defines a conditional distribution, we argue that the complexity of the distribution is an indicator of hallucination. However, the density of the distribution is unknown and the samples (i.e., responses generated for the prompt) are discrete distributions, which leads to a significant challenge in quantifying the complexity of the distribution. We propose to compute the optimal-transport distances between the sets of token embeddings of pairwise samples, which yields a Wasserstein distance matrix measuring the costs of transforming between the samples. This Wasserstein distance matrix provides a means to quantify the complexity of the distribution defined by the LLM with the prompt. Based on the Wasserstein distance matrix, we derive two complementary signals: AvgWD, measuring the average cost, and EigenWD, measuring the cost complexity. This leads to a training-free detector for hallucinations in LLMs. We further extend the framework to black-box LLMs via teacher forcing with an accessible teacher model. Experiments show that AvgWD and EigenWD are competitive with strong uncertainty baselines and provide complementary behavior across models and datasets, highlighting distribution complexity as an effective signal for LLM truthfulness.