cs.CLFeb 13, 2026

The System Hallucination Scale (SHS): A Human-Centered Instrument for Assessing Perceived Reliability of Large Language Models

Authors: Heimo Müller, Dominik Steiger, Markus Plass, Andreas Holzinger

Organizations: Machine Learning and Information Science Group, Medical University of Graz, Austria · Human Machine Mind Cooperation, Graz, Austria · MIDATA Cooperative, Zurich, Switzerland · Human-Centered AI Lab, BOKU University Vienna, Austria

Abstract

Large language models routinely produce factually incorrect or misleading outputs, yet conventional automated benchmarks overlook how users perceive reliability during interaction. We introduce the System Hallucination Scale (SHS), a lightweight instrument modeling the famous System Usability Scale (SUS) and System Causability Scales (SCS). SHS measures perceived reliability across five dimensions: factual accuracy, source reliability, logical coherence, deceptiveness of presentation, and responsiveness to user guidance, using ten balanced Likert-scale items that provide a directional score and consistency diagnostic. In a supervised validation study with 193 participants (386 evaluations across 47 trained experimenters), SHS demonstrated strong internal consistency and high clarity, completing in an average of 4.2 minutes. Participants rated source verifiability and presentation deceptiveness worse than factual accuracy, indicating perceived vulnerabilities lie primarily in traceability and framing. As a proof of concept, SHS assesses human-perceived reliability rather than ground-truth correctness, providing open-source multilingual implementations and an interactive calculator.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Mar 5, 2026

Judge Reliability Harness: Stress Testing the Reliability of LLM Judges

We present the Judge Reliability Harness, an open source library for constructing validation suites that test the reliability of LLM judges. As LLM based scoring is widely deployed in AI benchmarks, more tooling is needed to efficiently assess the reliability of these methods. Given a benchmark dataset and an LLM judge configuration, the harness generates reliability tests that evaluate both binary judgment accuracy and ordinal grading performance for free-response and agentic task formats. We evaluate four state-of-the-art judges across four benchmarks spanning safety, persuasion, misuse, and agentic behavior, and find meaningful variation in performance across models and perturbation types, highlighting opportunities to improve the robustness of LLM judges. No judge that we evaluated is uniformly reliable across benchmarks using our harness. For example, our preliminary experiments on judges revealed consistency issues as measured by accuracy in judging another LLM's ability to complete a task due to simple text formatting changes, paraphrasing, changes in verbosity, and flipping the ground truth label in LLM-produced responses. The code for this tool is available at: https://github.com/RANDCorporation/judge-reliability-harness
Feb 23, 2026

KGHaluBench: A Knowledge Graph-Based Hallucination Benchmark for Evaluating the Breadth and Depth of LLM Knowledge

Large Language Models (LLMs) possess a remarkable capacity to generate persuasive and intelligible language. However, coherence does not equate to truthfulness, as the responses often contain subtle hallucinations. Existing benchmarks are limited by static and narrow questions, leading to limited coverage and misleading evaluations. We present KGHaluBench, a Knowledge Graph-based hallucination benchmark that assesses LLMs across the breadth and depth of their knowledge, providing a fairer and more comprehensive insight into LLM truthfulness. Our framework utilises the KG to dynamically construct challenging, multifaceted questions, whose difficulty is then statistically estimated to address popularity bias. Our automated verification pipeline detects abstentions and verifies the LLM's response at both conceptual and correctness levels to identify different types of hallucinations. We evaluate 25 frontier models, using novel accuracy and hallucination metrics. The results provide a more interpretable insight into the knowledge factors that cause hallucinations across different model sizes. KGHaluBench is publicly available to support future developments in hallucination mitigation.
Oct 19, 2026

Fluent but Fallible: Benchmarking Hallucination and Factual Reliability in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing and artificial intelligence applications through their capabilities in reasoning, text generation and knowledge retrieval. However, LLMs are still vulnerable to two important challenges: hallucination, generating factually incorrect or fabricated content, and response deviation, meaning systematic deviations from ground-truth responses. These limitations raise serious concerns regarding reliability and trustworthiness in academic and research environments. This study offers a thorough comparative analysis using a variety of metrics of ten advanced LLMs ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude3.5Sonnet, LLaMA3, Mistral, Grok, Perplexity, DeepSeekV3, Falcon, and Gemma based on a benchmark consisting of 70 carefully designed academic prompts across four complexity levels: Basic, Explanation, Advanced, and Tricky, evaluated in February 2025 on specific model versions. Each response was independently evaluated by three reviewers using five metrics: Accuracy, Precision, Recall, Response Deviation Index, and Hallucination Index. Perplexity and DeepSeekV3 achieved the highest overall accuracy, while Gemini demonstrated strong recall and a well-balanced performance profile across all five metrics. LLaMA3 showed strong resistance against hallucinations through a conservative method of generation. Advanced-level prompts proved most challenging across all models, while Tricky prompts were handled more reliably owing to their binary true/false structure. Falcon achieved perfect precision and zero hallucinations, but at the cost of the lowest recall and the highest response deviation. The results show a fundamental trade-off between response completeness and factual reliability, intensified by prompt complexity.