Hallucinations

Zero-shot MRI reconstruction relies on generative priors, but single-modality unconditional priors produce hallucinations under severe ill-posedness. In many clinical workflows, complementary MRI acquisitions (e.g. high-quality structural scans) are routinely available, yet existing reconstruction methods lack mechanisms to leverage this additional information. We propose MPFlow, a zero-shot multi-modal reconstruction framework built on rectified flow that incorporates auxiliary MRI modalities at inference time without retraining the generative prior to improve anatomical fidelity. Cross-modal guidance is enabled by our proposed self-supervised pretraining strategy, Patch-level Multi-modal MR Image Pretraining (PAMRI), which learns shared representations across modalities. Sampling is jointly guided by data consistency and cross-modal feature alignment using pre-trained PAMRI, systematically suppressing intrinsic and extrinsic hallucinations. Extensive experiments on HCP and BraTS show that MPFlow matches diffusion baselines on image quality using only 20% of sampling steps while reducing tumor hallucinations by more than 15% (segmentation dice score). This demonstrates that cross-modal guidance enables more reliable and efficient zero-shot MRI reconstruction.

Large language model (LLM) hallucinations, meaning fluent but factually incorrect generations, fall into two types: faithfulness violations, where the model misuses provided context, and factuality violations, where answers reflect errors in internal knowledge. Proper mitigation depends on knowing which source drives each answer. We study contributive attribution, i.e. the classification of the dominant knowledge source behind each output, and show that a simple linear probe trained on hidden representations can reliably identify it. We introduce AttriWiki, a self-supervised pipeline that automatically generates labelled training data by prompting models to recall withheld entities from memory or read them from context without relying on knowledge conflicts. Probes trained on AttriWiki achieve up to 0.96 Macro-$F_1$ on Llama-3.1-8B, Mistral-7B, and Qwen-7B, transfer to SQuAD and WebQuestions with 0.94-0.99 Macro-$F_1$, and generalise zero-shot to Tighidet et al. (2024)'s benchmark, outperforming their probe on conflicting settings without retraining. Furthermore, attribution mismatches raise error rates by up to 70%, though correct attribution does not guarantee correct answers, pointing to the need for broader detection frameworks.

Uncertainty quantification has emerged as an effective approach to closed-book hallucination detection for LLMs, but existing methods are largely designed for short-form outputs and do not generalize well to long-form generation. We introduce a taxonomy for fine-grained uncertainty quantification in long-form LLM outputs that distinguishes methods by design choices at three stages: response decomposition, unit-level scoring, and response-level aggregation. We formalize several families of consistency-based black-box scorers, providing generalizations and extensions of existing methods. We also introduce FactScore-STEM-Geo, a new 400-question long-form QA dataset spanning four categories across STEM and Geography. In our experiments across multiple LLMs and datasets, we find 1) claim-response entailment consistently performs better or on par with more complex claim-level scorers, 2) claim-level scoring generally yields better results than sentence-level scoring, and 3) uncertainty-aware decoding is highly effective for improving the factuality of long-form outputs. Our framework clarifies relationships between prior methods, enables apples-to-apples comparisons, and provides practical guidance for selecting components for fine-grained UQ.

This paper reformulates Transformer/Attention mechanisms in Large Language Models (LLMs) through measure theory and frequency analysis, theoretically demonstrating that hallucination is an inevitable structural limitation. The embedding space functions as a conditional expectation over a σ-algebra, and its failure to be isomorphic to the semantic truth set fundamentally causes logical consistency breakdown. WavePhaseNet Method The authors propose WavePhaseNet, which explicitly constructs a Semantic Conceptual Hierarchy Structure (SCHS) using Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT). By applying DFT along the sequence dimension, semantic information is decomposed into frequency bands: low-frequency components capture global meaning and intent, while high-frequency components represent local syntax and expression. This staged separation enables precise semantic manipulation in diagonalized space. Dimensionality Reduction GPT-4's 24,576-dimensional embedding space exhibits a 1/f spectral structure based on language self-similarity and Zipf's law. Through cumulative energy analysis, the authors derive that approximately 3,000 dimensions constitute the lower bound for "complete representation." This demonstrates that reduction from 24,576 to 3,000 dimensions preserves meaning and intent while enabling rigorous reasoning and suppressing hallucination. Cohomological Consistency Control The reduced embedding space, constructed via cohomological regularization over overlapping local windows, allows defining a graph structure and cochain complex. This quantifies inconsistencies among local inferences as coboundary-based losses. Applying harmonic projection based on Hodge theory positions cohomology as a computable regularization principle for controlling semantic consistency, extracting maximally consistent global representations.

Hallucinations remain a major obstacle for large language models (LLMs), especially in safety-critical domains. We present HALT (Hallucination Assessment via Log-probs as Time series), a lightweight hallucination detector that leverages only the top-20 token log-probabilities from LLM generations as a time series. HALT uses a gated recurrent unit model combined with entropy-based features to learn model calibration bias, providing an extremely efficient alternative to large encoders. Unlike white-box approaches, HALT does not require access to hidden states or attention maps, relying only on output log-probabilities. Unlike black-box approaches, it operates on log-probs rather than surface-form text, which enables stronger domain generalization and compatibility with proprietary LLMs without requiring access to internal weights. To benchmark performance, we introduce HUB (Hallucination detection Unified Benchmark), which consolidates prior datasets into ten capabilities covering both reasoning tasks (Algorithmic, Commonsense, Mathematical, Symbolic, Code Generation) and general purpose skills (Chat, Data-to-Text, Question Answering, Summarization, World Knowledge). While being 30x smaller, HALT outperforms Lettuce, a fine-tuned modernBERT-base encoder, achieving a 60x speedup gain on HUB. HALT and HUB together establish an effective framework for hallucination detection across diverse LLM capabilities.

Hallucination is a central failure mode of language models (LMs). We focus on hallucinations in response to questions like: "Which instrument did Glenn Gould play?", but we ask these questions for synthetic entities designed to be unknown to the model. We find that LMs like Gemma-7B-IT frequently hallucinate, i.e., they have difficulty recognizing that the hallucinated fact is not part of their knowledge. Based on the idea of linear relational embeddings, we put forward the following hypothesis. (i) Due to the abstract scheme that is used to represent them, LMs can easily produce plausible objects for non-existing subjects of linear relations, which can lead to hallucinations. (ii) For nonlinear relations, this mechanism for producing an object is not available and so a hallucination is easier to avoid. To test this hypothesis, we create SynthHal, a synthetic unknown-entity benchmark for 15 relations. We find that across four instruction-tuned models, relational linearity is a strong predictor of models hallucinating an object for an unknown subject vs refusing to give an answer, with correlations $r \in [.58, .84]$. While this is not direct evidence for the hypothesized causal mechanism, it is suggestive and opens up a new line of inquiry into understanding LM hallucinations.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly utilize massive context windows as working memory for autonomous tasks, their reliability fluctuates significantly depending on how information is distributed in real-world corpora. We investigate how fact placement, corpus-level distributions, and anti-hallucination ("Don't Make It Up") prompts influence model behavior by introducing a model-agnostic extended needle-in-a-haystack benchmark designed for scalability, which we apply to evaluate Gemini-2.5-flash, ChatGPT-5-mini, Claude-4.5-haiku, and Deepseek-v3.2-chat. Unlike prior work, we separately evaluate literal extraction, logical inference, and hallucination risk. We identify two critical failure modes: Distributional Collapse, where performance degrades significantly when evidence is dispersed; and a Safety Tax, where anti-hallucination prompts cause over-conservative refusal of present facts and evidence, sharply reducing accuracy. Our results suggest that many failures stem from ineffective context utilization, as models struggle to prioritize relevant information even when it is present. These findings highlight the need for model-specific robustness and effective context management to ensure reliable deployment in long-horizon agentic workflows.

Like visual processing, language processing is susceptible to illusions in which people systematically misperceive stimuli. In one such case--the comparative illusion (CI), e.g., More students have been to Russia than I have--comprehenders tend to judge the sentence as acceptable despite its underlying nonsensical comparison. Prior research has argued that this phenomenon can be explained as Bayesian inference over a noisy channel: the posterior probability of an interpretation of a sentence is proportional to both the prior probability of that interpretation and the likelihood of corruption into the observed (CI) sentence. Initial behavioral work has supported this claim by evaluating a narrow set of alternative interpretations of CI sentences and showing that comprehenders favor interpretations that are more likely to have been corrupted into the illusory sentence. In this study, we replicate and go substantially beyond this earlier work by directly predicting the strength of illusion with a quantitative model of the posterior probability of plausible interpretations, which we derive through a novel synthesis of statistical language models with human behavioral data. Our model explains not only the fine gradations in the strength of CI effects, but also a previously unexplained effect caused by pronominal vs. full noun phrase than-clause subjects. These findings support a noisy-channel theory of sentence comprehension by demonstrating that the theory makes novel predictions about the comparative illusion that bear out empirically. This outcome joins related evidence of noisy channel processing in both illusory and non-illusory contexts to support noisy channel inference as a unified computational-level theory of diverse language processing phenomena.

Large Audio-Language Models (LALMs) excel in Audio QA but often suffer from hallucinations ungrounded in the audio. To our knowledge, we are the first to propose applying vector steering to the audio domain to mitigate this. Unlike text-based steering, our silence-anchored contrastive approach steers the model away from hallucinations by contrasting active audio against a silent baseline. Probing internal states reveals a strong correlation between specific layer representations and output correctness. Leveraging this, we introduce Layer-Weighted Vector Steering (LWVS), a training-free intervention that increases steering strength at influential layers. On the Audio Hallucination QA dataset, LWVS significantly outperforms baselines, boosting Recall on the Gemma model by 15.6% (53.4% to 69.0%). Crucially, MMAU benchmark tests confirm LWVS preserves and even enhances general audio understanding, achieving an 8% relative accuracy increase on the Qwen model (54.8% to 59.2%).

Mental imagery vividness is a stable individual trait, yet whether imagined scenarios share relational structure across human and synthetic large language model (LLM) populations remains unknown. We applied psychological network analysis to vividness ratings from two validated questionnaires: the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ-2) and the Plymouth Sensory Imagery Questionnaire (PSIQ), across geographically and linguistically distinct human samples (Florida, Poland, and London; total N = 2,743) and six large language models (LLMs; Gemma3-12B/27B, their quantization-aware counterparts, Llama3.3-70B, and Llama4-16x17B). Imagination networks were constructed as regularized partial correlation graphs, with node centrality and community structure compared across populations using Pearson correlations and the Adjusted Rand Index (ARI). Human networks showed robust cross-population centrality correlations for expected influence, strength, and closeness (r = 0.31-0.93), and community detection recovered clusters aligned with VVIQ-2 scene contexts (ARI = 0.27-0.40) and PSIQ sensory modalities (ARI = 0.87-1.0). Betweenness centrality was unstable across all populations, consistent with its sensitivity to individual experiential history. LLMs failed to replicate human network structure: LLM-human centrality correlations were weak and largely non-significant after correction, and most LLM configurations produced degenerate single-cluster topologies (median ARI = 0). This failure was consistent across model architectures, parameter scales (12B-272B), and conversational conditions. We posit that these findings may be driven by human imagination networks reflecting memory organization accumulated through embodied experience, a representational structure that linguistic training alone does not reproduce regardless of model scale and conversational memory.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) recently achieve significant breakthroughs in understanding complex visual-textual contexts. However, hallucination issues still limit their real-world applicability. Although previous mitigation methods effectively reduce hallucinations in photographic images, they largely overlook the potential risks posed by stylized images, which play crucial roles in critical scenarios such as game scene understanding, art education, and medical analysis. In this work, we first construct a dataset comprising photographic images and their corresponding stylized versions with carefully annotated caption labels. We then conduct head-to-head comparisons on both discriminative and generative tasks by benchmarking 13 advanced LVLMs on the collected datasets. Our findings reveal that stylized images tend to induce significantly more hallucinations than their photographic counterparts. To address this issue, we propose Style-Aware Visual Early Revision SAVER, a novel mechanism that dynamically adjusts LVLMs' final outputs based on the token-level visual attention patterns, leveraging early-layer feedback to mitigate hallucinations caused by stylized images. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SAVER achieves state-of-the-art performance in hallucination mitigation across various models, datasets, and tasks.

Empowered by large language models (LLMs), intelligent agents have become a popular paradigm for interacting with open environments to facilitate AI deployment. However, hallucinations generated by LLMs-where outputs are inconsistent with facts-pose a significant challenge, undermining the credibility of intelligent agents. Only if hallucinations can be mitigated, the intelligent agents can be used in real-world without any catastrophic risk. Therefore, effective detection and mitigation of hallucinations are crucial to ensure the dependability of agents. Unfortunately, the related approaches either depend on white-box access to LLMs or fail to accurately identify hallucinations. To address the challenge posed by hallucinations of intelligent agents, we present HalMit, a novel black-box watchdog framework that models the generalization bound of LLM-empowered agents and thus detect hallucinations without requiring internal knowledge of the LLM's architecture. Specifically, a probabilistic fractal sampling technique is proposed to generate a sufficient number of queries to trigger the incredible responses in parallel, efficiently identifying the generalization bound of the target agent. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that HalMit significantly outperforms existing approaches in hallucination monitoring. Its black-box nature and superior performance make HalMit a promising solution for enhancing the dependability of LLM-powered systems.

Despite the impressive capabilities of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs), they remain susceptible to hallucinations, where generated content is inconsistent with the input image. Existing training-free hallucination mitigation methods often suffer from unstable performance and high sensitivity to hyperparameter settings, which limits their practicality and broader adoption. In this paper, we propose Decoding with Inter-layer Consistency via Layer Aggregation (DCLA), a training-free decoding mechanism that requires no retraining, fine-tuning, or access to external knowledge bases. Specifically, DCLA constructs a dynamic semantic reference by aggregating representations from previous layers and uses it to correct semantically deviated layers, thereby enforcing inter-layer consistency. Experiments across seven LVLMs and multiple benchmarks demonstrate the generality of DCLA: it surpasses standard decoding by 28.58 MME points on LLaVA1.5-7B and 42.6 MME points on Qwen2.5-VL, while improving POPE accuracy by 2.74 percentage points in the strongest setting.

An Achilles heel of Large Language Models (LLMs) is their tendency to hallucinate non-factual statements. A response mixed of factual and non-factual statements poses a challenge for humans to verify and accurately base their decisions on. To combat this problem, we propose Highlighted Chain-of-Thought Prompting (HoT), a technique for prompting LLMs to generate responses with XML tags that ground facts to those provided in the question. That is, given an input question, LLMs would first re-format the question to add XML tags highlighting key facts, and then, generate a response with highlights over the facts referenced from the input. Compared to vanilla chain of thought prompting (CoT), HoT reduces the rate of hallucination and separately improves LLM accuracy consistently on over 22 tasks from arithmetic, reading comprehension, to logical reasoning. When asking humans to verify LLM responses, highlights help time-limited participants to more accurately and efficiently recognize when LLMs are correct. Yet, surprisingly, when LLMs are wrong, HoTs tend to fool users into believing that an answer is correct.

Large Language Models (LLMs) often hallucinate, limiting their reliability in sensitive applications. In black-box settings, several self-consistency-based techniques have been proposed for hallucination detection. We empirically show that these methods perform nearly as well as a supervised (black-box) oracle, leaving limited room for further gains within this paradigm. To address this limitation, we explore cross-model consistency checking between the target model and an additional verifier LLM. With this extra information, we observe improved oracle performance compared to purely self-consistency-based methods. We then propose a budget-friendly, two-stage detection algorithm that calls the verifier model only for a subset of cases. It dynamically switches between self-consistency and cross-consistency based on an uncertainty interval of the self-consistency classifier. We provide a geometric interpretation of consistency-based hallucination detection methods through the lens of kernel mean embeddings, offering deeper theoretical insights. Extensive experiments on QA-style hallucination detection benchmarks show that this approach maintains high detection performance while significantly reducing computational cost.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly generate citation-backed responses, yet citation hallucination remains a major challenge for trustworthy scientific information access. We introduce REASONS, a benchmark of 12,723 sentence-level citation instances spanning 12 arXiv subject categories, designed to evaluate scientific citation attribution under varying evidence conditions. We propose a dual-metric framework consisting of Abstention Rate (AR) and Hallucination Rate (HR) to characterize the trade-off between reliability and responsiveness. Using author-attribution and title-attribution tasks, we evaluate proprietary and open-source LLMs under zero-context, metadata-augmented, cascaded metadata-augmented prompting (CMP), retrieval-augmented, and adversarial settings. Advanced RAG lowers HR relative to Naive RAG (65.4% vs. 87.6%) but reduces AR from 5.0% to 0%. Under adversarial metadata, several systems exceed 85% HR, while retrieval-augmented variants frequently maintain near-zero abstention. Human evaluation of 1,000 outputs ($κ=0.78$) finds a 12.7:1 ratio of factual hallucinations to acceptable paraphrases. Our findings demonstrate that citation attribution systems should be evaluated not only for correctness but also for their ability to abstain appropriately under uncertainty. REASONS provides a benchmark and evaluation framework for studying attribution reliability in citation generation.

Psycholinguistics studies show that human readers fall for coherence illusions: an incoherent discourse can seem coherent simply because a distractor matches what comes next. We investigate whether Dutch language models (6 monolingual and 4 multilingual) show the same behavior on texts that link back to earlier context with words such as 'again' and 'too'. First, we find that surprisal at the critical word tracks human acceptability judgments and eye-tracking data. Models are more surprised by incoherent continuations, but a matching distractor in the prior context reduces this surprisal. Second, attention entropy identifies heads that behave differently under coherence vs. incoherence. We find that ablating these heads shows transfer effects across experiments, suggesting a shared mechanism. Third, we introduce energy from the associative-memory literature as a metric to quantify discourse coherence. Taken together, our results show that coherence illusions arise in Dutch LLMs, with entropy and energy exposing mechanisms that operate across settings.

Recent work has argued normatively, on synthetic data, that evaluating survival models by discrimination alone (concordance index) yields systematically misleading model comparisons, because the metric ignores calibration and time-dependent accuracy. Whether this matters for real, published, non-clinical models has not been tested. We reproduce three published survival-ML models across three structurally distinct domains -- hard-drive failure prediction, peer-to-peer credit default, and user disengagement on digital platforms -- validate our instrument against the anchor paper's own synthetic experiment, and test five pre-registered hypotheses under a Holm-corrected family-wise error rate. Three of five reject (though one pre-registered threshold clears by a narrow margin). A model reproducing the published literature's discrimination almost exactly (C = 0.9595 vs. 0.958 reported) fails a formal calibration test at p < 0.001; a broad feature-ablation search finds no single attribute responsible for its discrimination, so the calibration failure is not a trivial shortcut artifact. A lender's estimated default risk is biased upward by roughly two percentage points, growing to nearly four in the riskiest segment, when loan prepayment is treated as non-informative censoring rather than a competing risk. A platform's churn model shows probability estimates that degrade with the horizon even as global discrimination stays within the pre-registered C-index band. A direct test of whether metric choice inverts model preference does not reject, though with limited power given two to three models per domain; the failure mode we document is better characterized as misplaced confidence in a chosen model than as choosing the wrong one. We release a pre-registered evaluation harness with full code and an annotated notebook, so these results can be verified independently and the audit extended.