HackerPapers

arXiv:2305.18248cs.CL

Do Language Models Know When They're Hallucinating References?

Ayush Agrawal, Mirac Suzgun, Lester Mackey, Adam Tauman Kalai

Abstract

State-of-the-art language models (LMs) are notoriously susceptible to generating hallucinated information. Such inaccurate outputs not only undermine the reliability of these models but also limit their use and raise serious concerns about misinformation and propaganda. In this work, we focus on hallucinated book and article references and present them as the "model organism" of language model hallucination research, due to their frequent and easy-to-discern nature. We posit that if a language model cites a particular reference in its output, then it should ideally possess sufficient information about its authors and content, among other relevant details. Using this basic insight, we illustrate that one can identify hallucinated references without ever consulting any external resources, by asking a set of direct or indirect queries to the language model about the references. These queries can be considered as "consistency checks." Our findings highlight that while LMs, including GPT-4, often produce inconsistent author lists for hallucinated references, they also often accurately recall the authors of real references. In this sense, the LM can be said to "know" when it is hallucinating references. Furthermore, these findings show how hallucinated references can be dissected to shed light on their nature. Replication code and results can be found at https://github.com/microsoft/hallucinated-references.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.CLComputation and Language cs.AIArtificial Intelligence

On Hacker News

Linked by 4 identifiable commenters in 4 comments across 4 threads, from Aug 2023 to Mar 2025. Found in 1 HN submission from May 2023 to May 2023. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments4 threads

    • There are various results that suggest that LLMs do internally have everything they'd need to know that they're hallucinating/wrong: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09733 https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18248 https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2024-06-20-major-research-hallucin... So I don't think…

      cornel_ioView on HNParent context

    • > How do we make sure that the output is factual and not hallucinated? One method the readme doesn't mention: ask the same question multiple times. Apparently research suggests that when LLMs hallucinate answers, their hallucination is likely to be a different one every time…

      PoignardAzurView on HNParent context

    • https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18248 "In particular, we find that LMs often hallucinate differing authors of hallucinated references when queried in independent sessions, while consistently identify authors of real references. This suggests that the hallucination may be more a…

      famouswafflesView on HNParent context

    • Well it does have concept of right and wrong, as evidenced here https://chat.openai.com/share/e117e800-f579-4eec-9192-e9912f... you can ask it wrong answers only and it will oblige. Correctness is something it learns. I've read a few papers about hallucinations, and the jury is…

      avereveardView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.