pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2508.15396 · v2 · submitted 2025-08-21 · 💻 cs.CL

Recognition: unknown

Attribution, Citation, and Quotation: A Survey of Evidence-based Text Generation with Large Language Models

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification 💻 cs.CL
keywords evidence-basedgenerationtextllmsattributionevaluationfieldlanguage
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The increasing adoption of large language models (LLMs) has raised serious concerns about their reliability and trustworthiness. As a result, a growing body of research focuses on evidence-based text generation with LLMs, aiming to link model outputs to supporting evidence to ensure traceability and verifiability. However, the field is fragmented due to inconsistent terminology, isolated evaluation practices, and a lack of unified benchmarks. To bridge this gap, we systematically analyze 134 papers, introduce a unified taxonomy of evidence-based text generation with LLMs, and investigate 300 evaluation metrics across seven key dimensions. Thereby, we focus on approaches that use citations, attribution, or quotations for evidence-based text generation. Building on this, we examine the distinctive characteristics and representative methods in the field. Finally, we highlight open challenges and outline promising directions for future work.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Are Finer Citations Always Better? Rethinking Granularity for Attributed Generation

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Enforcing sentence-level citations degrades LLM attribution quality by 16-276% versus paragraph-level, with larger models penalized more due to disrupted semantic synthesis.