pith. sign in

Canonical reference

Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation

Canonical reference. 88% of citing Pith papers cite this work as background.

55 Pith papers citing it
2,906 external citations · Crossref
Background 88% of classified citations

citation-role summary

background 17

citation-polarity summary

claims ledger

  • background [315, 361]. Furthermore, Liu et al. [185], Zong et al. [395] and Liu et al. [184] show that LVLMs can be easily fooled and experience a severe performance drop due to their over-reliance on the strong language prior, as well as its inferior ability to defend against inappropriate user inputs [112, 134]. Jiang et al. [138], Wang et al. [315] and Jing et al. [141] took a step forward to holistically evaluate multi-modal hallucination. What's more, when presented with multiple images, LVLMs sometim

co-cited works

representative citing papers

CyberCertBench: Evaluating LLMs in Cybersecurity Certification Knowledge

cs.CR · 2026-04-22 · unverdicted · novelty 7.0

CyberCertBench shows frontier LLMs reach human-expert performance on general IT and networking security but drop on vendor-specific and formal standards questions such as IEC 62443, with a new framework for producing interpretable explanations.

When AI reviews science: Can we trust the referee?

cs.AI · 2026-04-26 · unverdicted · novelty 6.0

AI peer review systems are vulnerable to prompt injections, prestige biases, assertion strength effects, and contextual poisoning, as demonstrated by a new attack taxonomy and causal experiments on real conference submissions.

citing papers explorer

Showing 50 of 55 citing papers.