Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

FactCheckmate: Preemptively Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations in LMs

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.02899 v2 pith:LTZEBZ6V submitted 2024-10-03 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords factcheckmatehallucinationshiddenmodelstatesbeforecompareddetection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Language models (LMs) hallucinate. We inquire: Can we detect and mitigate hallucinations before they happen? This work answers this research question in the positive, by showing that the internal representations of LMs provide rich signals that can be used for this purpose. We introduce FactCheckmate, which preemptively detects hallucinations by learning a classifier that predicts whether the LM will hallucinate, based on the model's hidden states produced over the inputs, before decoding begins. If a hallucination is detected, FactCheckmate then intervenes by adjusting the LM's hidden states such that the model will produce more factual outputs. FactCheckmate provides fresh insights that the inner workings of LMs can be revealed by their hidden states. Practically, both its detection and mitigation models are lightweight, adding little inference overhead; FactCheckmate proves a more efficient approach for mitigating hallucinations compared to many post-hoc alternatives. We evaluate FactCheckmate over LMs of different scales and model families (including Llama, Mistral, Qwen and Gemma), across a variety of QA datasets from different domains. Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of FactCheckmate, achieving over 70% preemptive detection accuracy. On average, outputs generated by LMs with intervention are 34.4% more factual compared to those without.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The Curious Case of Factuality Finetuning: Models' Internal Beliefs Can Improve Factuality

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning on model-generated text filtered by internal probes improves factual accuracy more than fine-tuning on gold documents across three long-form generation domains.

  2. Teaching with Lies: Curriculum DPO on Synthetic Negatives for Hallucination Detection

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using hallucinated benchmark answers as rejected DPO pairs, ordered by an external fact-checker's grounding score, improves hallucination detection in 1B-3B Llama models.

Pith tools