OnionEval: An Unified Evaluation of Fact-conflicting Hallucination for Small-Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12975v1
• Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:59:44 GMT
• Title: OnionEval: An Unified Evaluation of Fact-conflicting Hallucination for Small-Large Language Models
• Authors: Chongren Sun, Yuran Li, Di Wu, Benoit Boulet,
• Abstract summary: OnionEval is designed to assess the fact-conflicting hallucination tendencies of small LLMs across different contextual levels. Our results reveal a key feature of SLLMs: they excel in factual analysis but face challenges with context reasoning. Further investigation shows that a simple Chain-of-Thought strategy can significantly reduce these limitations.
• Score: 6.727694415099734
• License:
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are highly capable but require significant computational resources for both training and inference. Within the LLM family, smaller models (those with fewer than 10 billion parameters) also perform well across various tasks. However, these smaller models share similar limitations to their larger counterparts, including the tendency to hallucinate. Despite the existence of many benchmarks to evaluate hallucination in LLMs, few have specifically focused on small LLMs (SLLMs). Additionally, SLLMs show widely varying performance across different benchmarks. In this paper, we introduce OnionEval, a multi-layer structured framework with a specific metric called the context-influence score (CI), designed to effectively assess the fact-conflicting hallucination tendencies of small LLMs across different contextual levels. Our experimental results reveal a key feature of SLLMs: they excel in factual analysis but face challenges with context reasoning. Further investigation shows that a simple Chain-of-Thought strategy can significantly reduce these limitations, improving the practical usefulness of SLLMs in real-world applications.

Related papers

• Benchmarking Large and Small MLLMs [71.78055760441256]
  Large multimodal language models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable advancements in understanding and generating multimodal content. However, their deployment faces significant challenges, including slow inference, high computational cost, and impracticality for on-device applications. Small MLLMs, exemplified by the LLava-series models and Phi-3-Vision, offer promising alternatives with faster inference, reduced deployment costs, and the ability to handle domain-specific scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-04T07:44:49Z)
• CARL-GT: Evaluating Causal Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models [18.975064947089805]
  Causal reasoning capabilities are essential for large language models (LLMs) in a wide range of applications, such as education and healthcare. We provide a benchmark, named by CARL-GT, which evaluates CAusal Reasoning capabilities of large Language models using Graphs and Tabular data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-23T20:34:32Z)
• What Makes In-context Learning Effective for Mathematical Reasoning: A Theoretical Analysis [81.15503859645149]
  In this paper, we aim to theoretically analyze the impact of in-context demonstrations on large language models' reasoning performance. We propose a straightforward, generalizable, and low-complexity demonstration selection method named LMS3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T11:38:11Z)
• Investigating the Role of Prompting and External Tools in Hallucination Rates of Large Language Models [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful computational models trained on extensive corpora of human-readable text, enabling them to perform general-purpose language understanding and generation. Despite these successes, LLMs often produce inaccuracies, commonly referred to as hallucinations. This paper provides an empirical evaluation of different prompting strategies and frameworks aimed at reducing hallucinations in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T08:34:53Z)
• The Good, The Bad, and The Greedy: Evaluation of LLMs Should Not Ignore Non-Determinism [39.392450788666814]
  Current evaluations of large language models (LLMs) often overlook non-determinism. greedy decoding generally outperforms sampling methods for most evaluated tasks. Smaller LLMs can match or surpass larger models such as GPT-4-Turbo.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T06:12:17Z)
• Analyzing LLM Behavior in Dialogue Summarization: Unveiling Circumstantial Hallucination Trends [38.86240794422485]
  We evaluate the faithfulness of large language models for dialogue summarization. Our evaluation reveals subtleties as to what constitutes a hallucination. We introduce two prompt-based approaches for fine-grained error detection that outperform existing metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T17:49:47Z)
• Why Lift so Heavy? Slimming Large Language Models by Cutting Off the Layers [2.1165011830664673]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) possess outstanding capabilities in addressing various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. The sheer size of these models poses challenges in terms of storage, training and inference due to the inclusion of billions of parameters through layer stacking. We show that even with fewer layers, LLMs maintain similar or better performance levels, particularly in prompt-based fine-tuning for text classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T20:47:10Z)
• Rethinking Interpretability in the Era of Large Language Models [76.1947554386879]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a wide array of tasks. The capability to explain in natural language allows LLMs to expand the scale and complexity of patterns that can be given to a human. These new capabilities raise new challenges, such as hallucinated explanations and immense computational costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-30T17:38:54Z)
• AMBER: An LLM-free Multi-dimensional Benchmark for MLLMs Hallucination Evaluation [58.19101663976327]
  Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) encounter the significant challenge of hallucinations. evaluating MLLMs' hallucinations is becoming increasingly important in model improvement and practical application deployment. We propose an LLM-free multi-dimensional benchmark AMBER, which can be used to evaluate both generative task and discriminative task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T15:25:42Z)
• Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
  We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools. Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions. Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z)
• Siren's Song in the AI Ocean: A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models [116.01843550398183]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a range of downstream tasks. LLMs occasionally generate content that diverges from the user input, contradicts previously generated context, or misaligns with established world knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-03T16:56:48Z)

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.