Embedding Trust: Semantic Isotropy Predicts Nonfactuality in Long-Form Text Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.21891v1
• Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 03:24:57 GMT
• Title: Embedding Trust: Semantic Isotropy Predicts Nonfactuality in Long-Form Text Generation
• Authors: Dhrupad Bhardwaj, Julia Kempe, Tim G. J. Rudner,
• Abstract summary: We introduce semantic isotropy -- the degree of uniformity across normalized text embeddings on the unit sphere.<n>We estimate the level of semantic isotropy of these responses as the angular dispersion of the embeddings on the unit sphere.<n>We find that higher semantic isotropy -- that is, greater embedding dispersion -- reliably signals lower factual consistency across samples.
• Score: 25.48843962368704
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: To deploy large language models (LLMs) in high-stakes application domains that require substantively accurate responses to open-ended prompts, we need reliable, computationally inexpensive methods that assess the trustworthiness of long-form responses generated by LLMs. However, existing approaches often rely on claim-by-claim fact-checking, which is computationally expensive and brittle in long-form responses to open-ended prompts. In this work, we introduce semantic isotropy -- the degree of uniformity across normalized text embeddings on the unit sphere -- and use it to assess the trustworthiness of long-form responses generated by LLMs. To do so, we generate several long-form responses, embed them, and estimate the level of semantic isotropy of these responses as the angular dispersion of the embeddings on the unit sphere. We find that higher semantic isotropy -- that is, greater embedding dispersion -- reliably signals lower factual consistency across samples. Our approach requires no labeled data, no fine-tuning, and no hyperparameter selection, and can be used with open- or closed-weight embedding models. Across multiple domains, our method consistently outperforms existing approaches in predicting nonfactuality in long-form responses using only a handful of samples -- offering a practical, low-cost approach for integrating trust assessment into real-world LLM workflows.

Related papers

• Revisiting Feedback Models for HyDE [49.53124785319461]
  HyDE is a method that enriches query representations with LLM-generated hypothetical answer documents.<n>Our experiments show that HyDE's effectiveness can be substantially improved when leveraging feedback algorithms such as Rocchio to extract and weight expansion terms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-24T17:50:18Z)
• Reasoning with Confidence: Efficient Verification of LLM Reasoning Steps via Uncertainty Heads [104.9566359759396]
  We propose a lightweight alternative for step-level reasoning verification based on data-driven uncertainty scores.<n>Our findings suggest that the internal states of LLMs encode their uncertainty and can serve as reliable signals for reasoning verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-09T03:38:29Z)
• Efficient semantic uncertainty quantification in language models via diversity-steered sampling [46.23327887393273]
  We introduce a diversity-steered sampler that discourages semantically redundant outputs during decoding.<n>Key idea is to inject a continuous semantic-similarity penalty into the model's proposal distribution.<n>Being modular and requiring no gradient access to the base LLM, the framework promises to serve as a drop-in enhancement for uncertainty estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T10:06:21Z)
• Prompt-Response Semantic Divergence Metrics for Faithfulness Hallucination and Misalignment Detection in Large Language Models [0.0]
  This paper introduces Semantic Divergence Metrics (SDM), a novel framework for detecting Faithfulness Hallucinations.<n>A heatmap of topic co-occurances between prompts and responses can be viewed as a quantified two-dimensional visualization of the user-machine dialogue.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-13T20:55:26Z)
• Reinforcement Learning for Better Verbalized Confidence in Long-Form Generation [27.811765400370838]
  We propose LoVeC (Long-form Verbalized Confidence), an on-the-fly verbalized confidence estimation method for long-form generation.<n>Specifically, we use reinforcement learning (RL) to train LLMs to append numerical confidence scores to each generated statement.<n>Our experiments show that our RL-trained models achieve better calibration and generalize robustly across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T18:05:20Z)
• Uncertainty Quantification for LLM-Based Survey Simulations [9.303339416902995]
  We investigate the use of large language models (LLMs) to simulate human responses to survey questions.<n>Our approach converts imperfect LLM-simulated responses into confidence sets for population parameters.<n>A key innovation lies in determining the optimal number of simulated responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T02:07:29Z)
• Variability Need Not Imply Error: The Case of Adequate but Semantically Distinct Responses [7.581259361859477]
  Uncertainty quantification tools can be used to reject a response when the model is uncertain'<n>We estimate the Probability the model assigns to Adequate Responses (PROBAR)<n>We find PROBAR to outperform semantic entropy across prompts with varying degrees of ambiguity/open-endedness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T09:02:26Z)
• CaLM: Contrasting Large and Small Language Models to Verify Grounded Generation [76.31621715032558]
  Grounded generation aims to equip language models (LMs) with the ability to produce more credible and accountable responses. We introduce CaLM, a novel verification framework. Our framework empowers smaller LMs, which rely less on parametric memory, to validate the output of larger LMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-08T06:04:55Z)
• Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations [53.15438489398938]
  Large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, but their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. We propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T16:35:30Z)
• Mitigating LLM Hallucinations via Conformal Abstention [70.83870602967625]
  We develop a principled procedure for determining when a large language model should abstain from responding in a general domain. We leverage conformal prediction techniques to develop an abstention procedure that benefits from rigorous theoretical guarantees on the hallucination rate (error rate) Experimentally, our resulting conformal abstention method reliably bounds the hallucination rate on various closed-book, open-domain generative question answering datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T11:32:03Z)
• ReEval: Automatic Hallucination Evaluation for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Transferable Adversarial Attacks [91.55895047448249]
  This paper presents ReEval, an LLM-based framework using prompt chaining to perturb the original evidence for generating new test cases. We implement ReEval using ChatGPT and evaluate the resulting variants of two popular open-domain QA datasets. Our generated data is human-readable and useful to trigger hallucination in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T06:37:32Z)
• Amortizing intractable inference in large language models [56.92471123778389]
  We use amortized Bayesian inference to sample from intractable posterior distributions. We empirically demonstrate that this distribution-matching paradigm of LLM fine-tuning can serve as an effective alternative to maximum-likelihood training. As an important application, we interpret chain-of-thought reasoning as a latent variable modeling problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-06T16:36:08Z)

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.