The First Token Knows: Single-Decode Confidence for Hallucination Detection
On the map: LLM reasoning → Hallucination detection and mitigation
Abstract (arXiv)
Self-consistency detects hallucinations by generating multiple sampled answers to a question and measuring agreement, but this requires repeated decoding and can be sensitive to lexical variation. Semantic self-consistency improves this by clustering sampled answers by meaning using natural language inference, but it adds both sampling cost and external inference overhead. We show that first-token confidence, phi_first, computed from the normalized entropy of the top-K logits at the first content-bearing answer token of a single greedy decode, matches or modestly exceeds semantic self-consistency on closed-book short-answer factual question answering. Across three 7-8B instruction-tuned models and two benchmarks, phi_first achieves a mean AUROC of 0.820, compared with 0.793 for semantic agreement and 0.791 for standard surface-form self-consistency. A subsumption test shows that phi_first is moderately to strongly correlated with semantic agreement, and combining the two signals yields only a small AUROC improvement over phi_first alone. These results suggest that much of the uncertainty information captured by multi-sample agreement is already available in the model's initial token distribution. We argue that phi_first should be reported as a default low-cost baseline before invoking sampling-based uncertainty estimation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Hallucination detection and mitigation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 13 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 May 2026.
Builds on
13 of 14 references.
References · 13
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,713
- 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,895
- 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,783
- 2022When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memoriescited by 1,103
- 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 946
- 2023Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generationcited by 795
- 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 788
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 644
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Decoding Memories: An Efficient Pipeline for Self-Consistency Hallucination Detection
- 2023SAC3: Reliable Hallucination Detection in Black-Box Language Models via Semantic-aware Cross-check Consistency
- 2025Joint Evaluation of Answer and Reasoning Consistency for Hallucination Detection in Large Reasoning Models
- 2025Shaking to Reveal: Perturbation-Based Detection of LLM Hallucinations
- 2026Listen to the Layers: Mitigating Hallucinations with Inter-Layer Disagreement
- 2026Detecting Hallucinations in Retrieval-Augmented Generation through Grounding-Aware Sensitivity by Perturbation (GASP)
- 2025SelfCheck-Eval: A Multi-Module Framework for Zero-Resource Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models
- 2026Logical Consistency as a Bridge: Improving LLM Hallucination Detection via Label Constraint Modeling between Responses and Self-Judgments