A Survey of Automatic Hallucination Evaluation on Natural Language Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.12041v4
• Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 20:04:51 GMT
• Title: A Survey of Automatic Hallucination Evaluation on Natural Language Generation
• Authors: Siya Qi, Lin Gui, Yulan He, Zheng Yuan,
• Abstract summary: The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) has brought a pressing challenge: how to reliably assess hallucinations to guarantee model trustworthiness.<n>This survey addresses this critical gap through a systematic analysis of 105 evaluation methods, revealing that 77.1% specifically target LLMs.<n>We formulate a structured framework to organize the field, based on a survey of foundational datasets and benchmarks and a taxonomy of evaluation methodologies.
• Score: 21.37538215193138
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) has brought a pressing challenge: how to reliably assess hallucinations to guarantee model trustworthiness. Although Automatic Hallucination Evaluation (AHE) has become an indispensable component of this effort, the field remains fragmented in its methodologies, limiting both conceptual clarity and practical progress. This survey addresses this critical gap through a systematic analysis of 105 evaluation methods, revealing that 77.1% specifically target LLMs, a paradigm shift that demands new evaluation frameworks. We formulate a structured framework to organize the field, based on a survey of foundational datasets and benchmarks and a taxonomy of evaluation methodologies, which together systematically document the evolution from pre-LLM to post-LLM approaches. Beyond taxonomical organization, we identify fundamental limitations in current approaches and their implications for real-world deployment. To guide future research, we delineate key challenges and propose strategic directions, including enhanced interpretability mechanisms and integration of application-specific evaluation criteria, ultimately providing a roadmap for developing more robust and practical hallucination evaluation systems.

Related papers

• Chunking, Retrieval, and Re-ranking: An Empirical Evaluation of RAG Architectures for Policy Document Question Answering [0.0]
  The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into the public health policy sector offers a transformative approach to navigating the vast repositories of regulatory guidance maintained by agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)<n>The propensity for LLMs to generate hallucinations, defined as plausible but factually incorrect assertions, presents a critical barrier to the adoption of these technologies in high-stakes environments where information integrity is non-negotiable.<n>This empirical evaluation explores the effectiveness of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) architectures in mitigating these risks by grounding generative outputs in authoritative document context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T20:52:48Z)
• A Quantitative Evaluation Framework for Explainable AI in Semantic Segmentation [0.20999222360659606]
  This work introduces a comprehensive quantitative evaluation framework for assessing explainable AI (XAI) in semantic segmentation.<n>The framework integrates pixel-level evaluation strategies with carefully designed metrics to yield fine-grained interpretability insights.<n>These findings advance the development of transparent, trustworthy, and accountable semantic segmentation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T13:27:38Z)
• Rethinking Evaluation of Infrared Small Target Detection [105.59753496831739]
  This paper introduces a hybrid-level metric incorporating pixel- and target-level performance, proposing a systematic error analysis method, and emphasizing the importance of cross-dataset evaluation.<n>An open-source toolkit has be released to facilitate standardized benchmarking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-21T02:45:07Z)
• A Scoping Review of Machine Learning Applications in Power System Protection and Disturbance Management [5.539105299550525]
  This scoping review synthesizes recent literature on machine learning (ML) applications in power system protection and disturbance management.<n>Three key objectives are addressed: (i) assessing the scope of ML research in protection tasks; (ii) evaluating ML performance across diverse operational scenarios; and (iii) identifying methods suitable for evolving grid conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T23:19:28Z)
• Medical Reasoning in the Era of LLMs: A Systematic Review of Enhancement Techniques and Applications [59.721265428780946]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) in medicine have enabled impressive capabilities, yet a critical gap remains in their ability to perform systematic, transparent, and verifiable reasoning.<n>This paper provides the first systematic review of this emerging field.<n>We propose a taxonomy of reasoning enhancement techniques, categorized into training-time strategies and test-time mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T14:41:31Z)
• Learning to Align Multi-Faceted Evaluation: A Unified and Robust Framework [61.38174427966444]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are being used more and more extensively for automated evaluation in various scenarios.<n>Previous studies have attempted to fine-tune open-source LLMs to replicate the evaluation explanations and judgments of powerful proprietary models.<n>We propose a novel evaluation framework, ARJudge, that adaptively formulates evaluation criteria and synthesizes both text-based and code-driven analyses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T06:31:45Z)
• Aspect-Guided Multi-Level Perturbation Analysis of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review [36.05498398665352]
  We propose an aspect-guided, multi-level perturbation framework to evaluate the robustness of Large Language Models (LLMs) in automated peer review.<n>Our framework explores perturbations in three key components of the peer review process-papers, reviews, and rebuttals-across several quality aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T03:50:06Z)
• The Lessons of Developing Process Reward Models in Mathematical Reasoning [62.165534879284735]
  Process Reward Models (PRMs) aim to identify and mitigate intermediate errors in the reasoning processes.<n>We develop a consensus filtering mechanism that effectively integrates Monte Carlo (MC) estimation with Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We release a new state-of-the-art PRM that outperforms existing open-source alternatives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-13T13:10:16Z)
• H-POPE: Hierarchical Polling-based Probing Evaluation of Hallucinations in Large Vision-Language Models [0.0]
  We propose H-POPE, a coarse-to-fine-grained benchmark that assesses hallucinations in object existence and attributes. Our evaluation shows that models are prone to hallucinations on object existence, and even more so on fine-grained attributes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T17:55:37Z)
• Auto-PRE: An Automatic and Cost-Efficient Peer-Review Framework for Language Generation Evaluation [52.76508734756661]
  Auto-PRE is an automatic evaluation framework inspired by the peer review process.<n>Unlike previous approaches that rely on human annotations, Auto-PRE automatically selects evaluators based on three core traits.<n> Experiments on three representative tasks, including summarization, non-factoid QA, and dialogue generation, demonstrate that Auto-PRE achieves state-of-the-art performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T06:06:06Z)
• MIBench: A Comprehensive Framework for Benchmarking Model Inversion Attack and Defense [42.56467639172508]
  Model Inversion (MI) attacks aim at leveraging the output information of target models to reconstruct privacy-sensitive training data.<n>We build the first practical benchmark named MIBench for systematic evaluation of model inversion attacks and defenses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T16:13:49Z)
• Beyond Metrics: A Critical Analysis of the Variability in Large Language Model Evaluation Frameworks [3.773596042872403]
  Large language models (LLMs) continue to evolve, the need for robust and standardized evaluation benchmarks becomes paramount. Various frameworks have emerged as noteworthy contributions to the field, offering comprehensive evaluation tests and benchmarks. This paper provides an exploration and critical analysis of some of these evaluation methodologies, shedding light on their strengths, limitations, and impact on advancing the state-of-the-art in natural language processing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T03:37:14Z)
• Benchmarks as Microscopes: A Call for Model Metrology [76.64402390208576]
  Modern language models (LMs) pose a new challenge in capability assessment. To be confident in our metrics, we need a new discipline of model metrology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-22T17:52:12Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.<n>We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.<n>Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• The Hallucinations Leaderboard -- An Open Effort to Measure Hallucinations in Large Language Models [24.11077502209129]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed the Natural Language Processing (NLP) landscape with their remarkable ability to understand and generate human-like text. However, these models are prone to hallucinations'' -- outputs that do not align with factual reality or the input context. This paper introduces the Hallucinations Leaderboard, an open initiative to quantitatively measure and compare the tendency of each model to produce hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T23:16:22Z)
• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [51.26815896167173]
  We present a comprehensive tertiary analysis of PAMI reviews along three complementary dimensions.<n>Our analyses reveal distinctive organizational patterns as well as persistent gaps in current review practices.<n>Finally, our evaluation of state-of-the-art AI-generated reviews indicates encouraging advances in coherence and organization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• Inadequacies of Large Language Model Benchmarks in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence [5.147767778946168]
  We critically assess 23 state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) benchmarks. Our research uncovered significant limitations, including biases, difficulties in measuring genuine reasoning, adaptability, implementation inconsistencies, prompt engineering complexity, diversity, and the overlooking of cultural and ideological norms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T11:08:10Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challenges [57.88520765782177]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened new avenues for assessing generated content quality, e.g., coherence, creativity, and context relevance. We propose a coherent taxonomy for organizing existing LLM-based evaluation metrics, offering a structured framework to understand and compare these methods. By discussing unresolved challenges, including bias, robustness, domain-specificity, and unified evaluation, this paper seeks to offer insights to researchers and advocate for fairer and more advanced NLG evaluation techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T15:59:09Z)
• Fine-grained Hallucination Detection and Editing for Language Models [109.56911670376932]
  Large language models (LMs) are prone to generate factual errors, which are often called hallucinations. We introduce a comprehensive taxonomy of hallucinations and argue that hallucinations manifest in diverse forms. We propose a novel task of automatic fine-grained hallucination detection and construct a new evaluation benchmark, FavaBench.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T19:02:48Z)
• Alleviating Hallucinations of Large Language Models through Induced Hallucinations [67.35512483340837]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been observed to generate responses that include inaccurate or fabricated information. We propose a simple textitInduce-then-Contrast Decoding (ICD) strategy to alleviate hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-25T12:32:49Z)
• On Early Detection of Hallucinations in Factual Question Answering [4.76359068115052]
  hallucinations remain a major impediment towards gaining user trust. In this work, we explore if the artifacts associated with the model generations can provide hints that the generation will contain hallucinations. Our results show that the distributions of these artifacts tend to differ between hallucinated and non-hallucinated generations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-19T14:35:04Z)
• Post Turing: Mapping the landscape of LLM Evaluation [22.517544562890663]
  This paper traces the historical trajectory of Large Language Models (LLMs) evaluations, from the foundational questions posed by Alan Turing to the modern era of AI research. We emphasize the pressing need for a unified evaluation system, given the broader societal implications of these models. This work serves as a call for the AI community to collaboratively address the challenges of LLM evaluation, ensuring their reliability, fairness, and societal benefit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T17:24:50Z)
• Towards Mitigating Hallucination in Large Language Models via Self-Reflection [63.2543947174318]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for generative and knowledge-intensive tasks including question-answering (QA) tasks. This paper analyses the phenomenon of hallucination in medical generative QA systems using widely adopted LLMs and datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T03:05:44Z)
• AutoHall: Automated Hallucination Dataset Generation for Large Language Models [56.92068213969036]
  This paper introduces a method for automatically constructing model-specific hallucination datasets based on existing fact-checking datasets called AutoHall. We also propose a zero-resource and black-box hallucination detection method based on self-contradiction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-30T05:20:02Z)
• Cognitive Mirage: A Review of Hallucinations in Large Language Models [10.86850565303067]
  We present a novel taxonomy of hallucinations from various text generation tasks. We provide theoretical insights, detection methods and improvement approaches. As hallucinations garner significant attention, we will maintain updates on relevant research progress.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-13T08:33:09Z)
• Plausible May Not Be Faithful: Probing Object Hallucination in Vision-Language Pre-training [66.0036211069513]
  Large-scale vision-language pre-trained models are prone to hallucinate non-existent visual objects when generating text. We show that models achieving better scores on standard metrics could hallucinate objects more frequently. Surprisingly, we find that patch-based features perform the best and smaller patch resolution yields a non-trivial reduction in object hallucination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-14T10:27:22Z)
• Evaluation Gaps in Machine Learning Practice [13.963766987258161]
  In practice, evaluations of machine learning models frequently focus on a narrow range of decontextualized predictive behaviours. We examine the evaluation gaps between the idealized breadth of evaluation concerns and the observed narrow focus of actual evaluations. By studying these properties, we demonstrate the machine learning discipline's implicit assumption of a range of commitments which have normative impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-11T04:00:44Z)
• Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation [69.9926849848132]
  Natural Language Generation (NLG) has improved exponentially in recent years thanks to the development of sequence-to-sequence deep learning technologies. Deep learning based generation is prone to hallucinate unintended text, which degrades the system performance. This survey serves to facilitate collaborative efforts among researchers in tackling the challenge of hallucinated texts in NLG.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-08T03:55:01Z)
• Towards Automatic Evaluation of Dialog Systems: A Model-Free Off-Policy Evaluation Approach [84.02388020258141]
  We propose a new framework named ENIGMA for estimating human evaluation scores based on off-policy evaluation in reinforcement learning. ENIGMA only requires a handful of pre-collected experience data, and therefore does not involve human interaction with the target policy during the evaluation. Our experiments show that ENIGMA significantly outperforms existing methods in terms of correlation with human evaluation scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-20T03:29:20Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.