REVIEW 2 cited by
Banishing LLM Hallucinations Requires Rethinking Generalization
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
Banishing LLM Hallucinations Requires Rethinking Generalization
read the original abstract
Despite their powerful chat, coding, and reasoning abilities, Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently hallucinate. Conventional wisdom suggests that hallucinations are a consequence of a balance between creativity and factuality, which can be mitigated, but not eliminated, by grounding the LLM in external knowledge sources. Through extensive systematic experiments, we show that these traditional approaches fail to explain why LLMs hallucinate in practice. Specifically, we show that LLMs augmented with a massive Mixture of Memory Experts (MoME) can easily memorize large datasets of random numbers. We corroborate these experimental findings with a theoretical construction showing that simple neural networks trained to predict the next token hallucinate when the training loss is above a threshold as it usually does in practice when training on internet scale data. We interpret our findings by comparing against traditional retrieval methods for mitigating hallucinations. We use our findings to design a first generation model for removing hallucinations -- Lamini-1 -- that stores facts in a massive mixture of millions of memory experts that are retrieved dynamically.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Whose Name Comes Up? II: Benchmarking and Intervention-Based Auditing of LLM-Based Scholar Recommendation
A new benchmark auditing LLM-based scholar recommendation across 22 models shows that inference-time interventions (temperature, constrained prompting, RAG) trade off technical quality against social representation ra...
-
DTKG: Dual-Track Knowledge Graph-Verified Reasoning Framework for Multi-Hop QA
DTKG routes multi-hop questions into either a fact-verification or knowledge-graph chain-reasoning branch, reporting modest accuracy gains on four QA benchmarks.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.