Mitigating Hallucinations in Large Language Models via Causal Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.12495v1
• Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2025 20:51:06 GMT
• Title: Mitigating Hallucinations in Large Language Models via Causal Reasoning
• Authors: Yuangang Li, Yiqing Shen, Yi Nian, Jiechao Gao, Ziyi Wang, Chenxiao Yu, Shawn Li, Jie Wang, Xiyang Hu, Yue Zhao,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) exhibit logically inconsistent hallucinations that appear coherent yet violate reasoning principles.<n>We introduce causal-DAG construction and reasoning (CDCR-SFT)<n>CDCR-SFT trains LLMs to explicitly construct variable-level directed acyclic graph (DAG) and then perform reasoning over it.
• Score: 16.830640147232295
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibit logically inconsistent hallucinations that appear coherent yet violate reasoning principles, with recent research suggesting an inverse relationship between causal reasoning capabilities and such hallucinations. However, existing reasoning approaches in LLMs, such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and its graph-based variants, operate at the linguistic token level rather than modeling the underlying causal relationships between variables, lacking the ability to represent conditional independencies or satisfy causal identification assumptions. To bridge this gap, we introduce causal-DAG construction and reasoning (CDCR-SFT), a supervised fine-tuning framework that trains LLMs to explicitly construct variable-level directed acyclic graph (DAG) and then perform reasoning over it. Moreover, we present a dataset comprising 25,368 samples (CausalDR), where each sample includes an input question, explicit causal DAG, graph-based reasoning trace, and validated answer. Experiments on four LLMs across eight tasks show that CDCR-SFT improves the causal reasoning capability with the state-of-the-art 95.33% accuracy on CLADDER (surpassing human performance of 94.8% for the first time) and reduces the hallucination on HaluEval with 10% improvements. It demonstrates that explicit causal structure modeling in LLMs can effectively mitigate logical inconsistencies in LLM outputs. Code is available at https://github.com/MrLYG/CDCR-SFT.

Related papers

• CausalFlip: A Benchmark for LLM Causal Judgment Beyond Semantic Matching [50.65932158912512]
  We propose a new causal reasoning benchmark, CausalFlip, to encourage the development of new large language models.<n>CaulFlip consists of causal judgment questions built over event triples that could form different confounder, chain, and collider relations.<n>We evaluate LLMs under multiple training paradigms, including answer-only training, explicit Chain-of-Thought supervision, and a proposed internalized causal reasoning approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T18:06:15Z)
• Uncovering Hidden Correctness in LLM Causal Reasoning via Symbolic Verification [56.51953062869371]
  DoVerifier is a symbolic verifier that checks whether causal expressions are derivable from a given causal graph using rules from do-calculus and probability theory.<n>Our evaluations on synthetic data and causal QA benchmarks show that DoVerifier more accurately captures semantic correctness of causal reasoning traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T03:22:58Z)
• Verifying Large Language Models' Reasoning Paths via Correlation Matrix Rank [71.09032766271493]
  Large language models (LLMs) are prone to errors and hallucinations.<n>How to check their outputs effectively and efficiently has become a critical problem in their applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T11:01:10Z)
• Making Mathematical Reasoning Adaptive [61.45161826629692]
  We propose the AdaR framework to enable adaptive reasoning in large language models (LLMs)<n>AdaR synthesizes logically equivalent queries by varying variable values, and trains models with RLVR on these data to penalize spurious logic.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that AdaR improves robustness and generalization, achieving substantial improvement in mathematical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T09:30:05Z)
• CLATTER: Comprehensive Entailment Reasoning for Hallucination Detection [60.98964268961243]
  We propose that guiding models to perform a systematic and comprehensive reasoning process allows models to execute much finer-grained and accurate entailment decisions.<n>We define a 3-step reasoning process, consisting of (i) claim decomposition, (ii) sub-claim attribution and entailment classification, and (iii) aggregated classification, showing that such guided reasoning indeed yields improved hallucination detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T17:02:52Z)
• MIRAGE: Assessing Hallucination in Multimodal Reasoning Chains of MLLM [58.2298313720146]
  Multimodal hallucinations are multi-sourced and arise from diverse causes.<n>Existing benchmarks fail to adequately distinguish between perception-induced hallucinations and reasoning-induced hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T05:54:36Z)
• The Curse of CoT: On the Limitations of Chain-of-Thought in In-Context Learning [56.574829311863446]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has been widely recognized for its ability to enhance reasoning capabilities in large language models (LLMs)<n>We demonstrate that CoT and its reasoning variants consistently underperform direct answering across varying model scales and benchmark complexities.<n>Our analysis uncovers a fundamental hybrid mechanism of explicit-implicit reasoning driving CoT's performance in pattern-based ICL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T13:51:06Z)
• Drowzee: Metamorphic Testing for Fact-Conflicting Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models [11.138489774712163]
  We propose an innovative approach leveraging logic programming to enhance metamorphic testing for detecting Fact-Conflicting Hallucinations (FCH) Our method generates test cases and detects hallucinations across six different large language models spanning nine domains, revealing rates ranging from 24.7% to 59.8%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T17:24:42Z)
• CausalBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Causal Learning Capability of LLMs [27.362012903540492]
  The ability to understand causality significantly impacts the competence of large language models (LLMs) in output explanation and counterfactual reasoning. The ability to understand causality significantly impacts the competence of large language models (LLMs) in output explanation and counterfactual reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T14:40:08Z)
• Deductive Beam Search: Decoding Deducible Rationale for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [10.86233584217013]
  Previous methods fail to address reasoning errors in intermediate steps, leading to accumulative errors. We propose Deductive Beam Search (DBS), which seamlessly integrates chain-of-thought reasoning with step-wise beam search for Large Language Models. Our approach deploys a verifier, verifying the deducibility of a reasoning step and its premises, thus alleviating the error accumulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-31T09:16:35Z)
• CLadder: Assessing Causal Reasoning in Language Models [82.8719238178569]
  We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can coherently reason about causality. We propose a new NLP task, causal inference in natural language, inspired by the "causal inference engine" postulated by Judea Pearl et al.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-07T15:12:12Z)
• Neuro-Symbolic Integration Brings Causal and Reliable Reasoning Proofs [95.07757789781213]
  Two lines of approaches are adopted for complex reasoning with LLMs.<n>One line of work prompts LLMs with various reasoning structures, while the structural outputs can be naturally regarded as intermediate reasoning steps.<n>The other line of work adopt LLM-free declarative solvers to do the reasoning task, rendering higher reasoning accuracy but lacking interpretability due to the black-box nature of the solvers.<n>We present a simple extension to the latter line of work. Specifically, we showcase that the intermediate search logs generated by Prolog interpreters can be accessed and interpreted into human-readable reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T11:26:21Z)

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.