Toward Epistemic Stability: Engineering Consistent Procedures for Industrial LLM Hallucination Reduction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.10047v1
• Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2026 19:15:13 GMT
• Title: Toward Epistemic Stability: Engineering Consistent Procedures for Industrial LLM Hallucination Reduction
• Abstract summary: Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) are outputs that are coherent but factually incorrect or contextually inconsistent.<n>We present and compare five prompt engineering strategies intended to reduce the variance of model outputs.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) are outputs that are syntactically coherent but factually incorrect or contextually inconsistent. They are persistent obstacles in high-stakes industrial settings such as engineering design, enterprise resource planning, and IoT telemetry platforms. We present and compare five prompt engineering strategies intended to reduce the variance of model outputs and move toward repeatable, grounded results without modifying model weights or creating complex validation models. These methods include: (M1) Iterative Similarity Convergence, (M2) Decomposed Model-Agnostic Prompting, (M3) Single-Task Agent Specialization, (M4) Enhanced Data Registry, and (M5) Domain Glossary Injection. Each method is evaluated against an internal baseline using an LLM-as-Judge framework over 100 repeated runs per method (same fixed task prompt, stochastic decoding at $τ= 0.7$. Under this evaluation setup, M4 (Enhanced Data Registry) received ``Better'' verdicts in all 100 trials; M3 and M5 reached 80\% and 77\% respectively; M1 reached 75\%; and M2 was net negative at 34\% when compared to single shot prompting with a modern foundation model. We then developed enhanced version 2 (v2) implementations and assessed them on a 10-trial verification batch; M2 recovered from 34\% to 80\%, the largest gain among the four revised methods. We discuss how these strategies help overcome the non-deterministic nature of LLM results for industrial procedures, even when absolute correctness cannot be guaranteed. We provide pseudocode, verbatim prompts, and batch logs to support independent assessment.

Related papers

• Can LLMs Learn and Apply Multi-Level Modelling Semantics? A First Empirical Study [2.9612857576788447]
  Multi-level modelling (MLM) can directly represent three or more abstraction levels, but this comes at the cost of more complex semantic constraints that model correctness depends on.<n>This paper presents the first empirical study of this question.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-14T20:41:43Z)
• Beyond Final Answers: CRYSTAL Benchmark for Transparent Multimodal Reasoning Evaluation [3.23600523782706]
  We introduce CRYSTAL (Clear Reasoning via Yielded Steps, Traceability, and Logic), a diagnostic benchmark with 6,372 instances that evaluates multimodal reasoning.<n>We propose two complementary metrics: Match F1, which scores step-level precision and recall via semantic similarity matching, and Ordered Match F1, which penalizes disordered reasoning chains.<n>CPR-Curriculum achieves a 32% improvement in Match F1 via GRPO where additive reward strategies fail, improving reasoning without manual step annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T15:48:15Z)
• RefineBench: Evaluating Refinement Capability of Language Models via Checklists [71.02281792867531]
  We evaluate two refinement modes: guided refinement and self-refinement.<n>In guided refinement, both proprietary LMs and large open-weight LMs can leverage targeted feedback to refine responses to near-perfect levels within five turns.<n>These findings suggest that frontier LMs require breakthroughs to self-refine their incorrect responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T07:20:52Z)
• MM-HELIX: Boosting Multimodal Long-Chain Reflective Reasoning with Holistic Platform and Adaptive Hybrid Policy Optimization [103.74675519953898]
  Long-chain reflective reasoning is a prerequisite for solving complex real-world problems.<n>We build a benchmark consisting 1,260 samples of 42 challenging synthetic tasks.<n>We generate post-training data and explore learning paradigms for exploiting such data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-09T17:53:58Z)
• MiroMind-M1: An Open-Source Advancement in Mathematical Reasoning via Context-Aware Multi-Stage Policy Optimization [74.04867639197445]
  MiroMind-M1 is a set of fully open-source RLMs built on the Qwen-2.5-based benchmarks.<n>Our models are trained in two stages: SFT on a carefully curated corpus of 719K math-reasoning problems with verified CoT trajectories, followed by RLVR on 62K challenging and verifiable problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-19T16:21:23Z)
• LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning [65.89293674479907]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across a myriad of tasks, yet they occasionally yield undesirable outputs.<n>We introduce LLM2, a novel framework that combines an LLM with a process-based verifier.<n>LLMs2 is responsible for generating plausible candidates, while the verifier provides timely process-based feedback to distinguish desirable and undesirable outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T06:32:36Z)
• LLM Robustness Against Misinformation in Biomedical Question Answering [50.98256373698759]
  The retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) approach is used to reduce the confabulation of large language models (LLMs) for question answering. We evaluate the effectiveness and robustness of four LLMs against misinformation in answering biomedical questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-27T16:23:26Z)
• MM-R$^3$: On (In-)Consistency of Vision-Language Models (VLMs) [26.475993408532304]
  We analyze performance of SoTA Vision Language Models on three tasks: Question Rephrasing, Image Restyling, and Context Reasoning.<n>Our analysis reveals that consistency does not always align with accuracy, indicating that models with higher accuracy are not necessarily more consistent, and vice versa.<n>We propose a simple yet effective mitigation strategy in the form of an adapter module trained to minimize inconsistency across prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T06:36:55Z)
• Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision [23.807288360423193]
  We propose a novel divide-and-conquer style Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) algorithm named textitOmegaPRM for the efficient collection of high-quality process supervision data.<n>We are able to collect over 1.5 million process supervision annotations to train Process Reward Models (PRMs)<n>This fully automated process supervision alongside the weighted self-consistency algorithm is able to enhance LLMs' math reasoning performances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T19:25:40Z)
• How Easy is It to Fool Your Multimodal LLMs? An Empirical Analysis on Deceptive Prompts [54.07541591018305]
  We present MAD-Bench, a benchmark that contains 1000 test samples divided into 5 categories, such as non-existent objects, count of objects, and spatial relationship. We provide a comprehensive analysis of popular MLLMs, ranging from GPT-4v, Reka, Gemini-Pro, to open-sourced models, such as LLaVA-NeXT and MiniCPM-Llama3. While GPT-4o achieves 82.82% accuracy on MAD-Bench, the accuracy of any other model in our experiments ranges from 9% to 50%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T18:31:27Z)
• Boosting Theory-of-Mind Performance in Large Language Models via Prompting [2.538209532048867]
  This study measures the ToM performance of GPT-4 and three GPT-3.5 variants. We investigated the effectiveness of in-context learning in improving ToM comprehension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-22T22:50:50Z)

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.