Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

THaMES: An End-to-End Tool for Hallucination Mitigation and Evaluation in Large Language Models

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 2409.11353 v3 pith:EPQO5T44 submitted 2024-09-17 cs.CL

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

Hallucination, the generation of factually incorrect content, is a growing challenge in Large Language Models (LLMs). Existing detection and mitigation methods are often isolated and insufficient for domain-specific needs, lacking a standardized pipeline. This paper introduces THaMES (Tool for Hallucination Mitigations and EvaluationS), an integrated framework and library addressing this gap. THaMES offers an end-to-end solution for evaluating and mitigating hallucinations in LLMs, featuring automated test set generation, multifaceted benchmarking, and adaptable mitigation strategies. It automates test set creation from any corpus, ensuring high data quality, diversity, and cost-efficiency through techniques like batch processing, weighted sampling, and counterfactual validation. THaMES assesses a model's ability to detect and reduce hallucinations across various tasks, including text generation and binary classification, applying optimal mitigation strategies like In-Context Learning (ICL), Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), and Parameter-Efficient Fine-tuning (PEFT). Evaluations of state-of-the-art LLMs using a knowledge base of academic papers, political news, and Wikipedia reveal that commercial models like GPT-4o benefit more from RAG than ICL, while open-weight models like Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct and Mistral-Nemo gain more from ICL. Additionally, PEFT significantly enhances the performance of Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct in both evaluation tasks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Asymmetric Communication: Large Language Models and Language Games

    cs.CY 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Human–LLM exchange is asymmetric communication: model outputs circulate without commitments, so AGI, hallucination, agency, sentience, and alignment are receiver-side category mistakes, and alignment is institutional ...

  2. Towards Inclusive NLP: Assessing Compressed Multilingual Transformers across Diverse Language Benchmarks

    cs.CL 2025-07 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    Across Arabic, English, and Kannada benchmarks, 4-bit and 8-bit quantization preserves most accuracy while aggressive pruning degrades larger multilingual models more than smaller ones.

  3. The Scales of Justitia: A Comprehensive Survey on Safety Evaluation of LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A structured survey of LLM safety evaluation that proposes a why/what/where/how taxonomy and catalogs metrics, datasets, benchmarks, evaluators, and frameworks.

Pith tools