Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Why and How LLMs Hallucinate: Connecting the Dots with Subsequence Associations

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 2504.12691 v1 pith:V6VPUTAX submitted 2025-04-17 cs.CL

Why and How LLMs Hallucinate: Connecting the Dots with Subsequence Associations

classification cs.CL
keywords associationshallucinationssubsequencecausesframeworkhallucinationllmsmodels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) frequently generate hallucinations-content that deviates from factual accuracy or provided context-posing challenges for diagnosis due to the complex interplay of underlying causes. This paper introduces a subsequence association framework to systematically trace and understand hallucinations. Our key insight is that hallucinations arise when dominant hallucinatory associations outweigh faithful ones. Through theoretical and empirical analyses, we demonstrate that decoder-only transformers effectively function as subsequence embedding models, with linear layers encoding input-output associations. We propose a tracing algorithm that identifies causal subsequences by analyzing hallucination probabilities across randomized input contexts. Experiments show our method outperforms standard attribution techniques in identifying hallucination causes and aligns with evidence from the model's training corpus. This work provides a unified perspective on hallucinations and a robust framework for their tracing and analysis.

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. Explainability of Large Language Models: Opportunities and Challenges toward Generating Trustworthy Explanations

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 4.0

    LLM explanations split into local and mechanistic tracks; the paper argues they are trustworthy only if they pass causal and contrastive stress tests, adapt to the explainee, and satisfy eight trust principles.