Retromorphic Testing with Hierarchical Verification for Hallucination Detection in RAG

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.27752v1
• Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2026 16:12:18 GMT
• Title: Retromorphic Testing with Hierarchical Verification for Hallucination Detection in RAG
• Abstract summary: We present RT4CHART, a retromorphic testing framework for context-faithfulness assessment.<n>It decomposes model outputs into independently verifiable claims and performs hierarchical, local-to-global verification.<n>It achieves the best answer-level hallucination detection F1 among all baselines.
• Score: 3.2327627739464635
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) continue to hallucinate in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), producing claims that are unsupported by or conflict with the retrieved context. Detecting such errors remains challenging when faithfulness is evaluated solely with respect to the retrieved context. Existing approaches either provide coarse-grained, answer-level scores or focus on open-domain factuality, often lacking fine-grained, evidence-grounded diagnostics. We present RT4CHART, a retromorphic testing framework for context-faithfulness assessment. RT4CHART decomposes model outputs into independently verifiable claims and performs hierarchical, local-to-global verification against the retrieved context. Each claim is assigned one of three labels: entailed, contradicted, or baseless. Furthermore, RT4CHART maps claim-level decisions back to specific answer spans and retrieves explicit supporting or refuting evidence from the context, enabling fine-grained and interpretable auditing. We evaluate RT4CHART on RAGTruth++ (408 samples) and RAGTruth-Enhance (2,675 samples), a newly re-annotated benchmark. RT4CHART achieves the best answer-level hallucination detection F1 among all baselines. On RAGTruth++, it reaches an F1 score of 0.776, outperforming the strongest baseline by 83%. On RAGTruth-Enhance, it achieves a span-level F1 of 47.5%. Ablation studies show that the hierarchical verification design is the primary driver of performance gains. Finally, our re-annotation reveals 1.68x more hallucination cases than the original labels, suggesting that existing benchmarks substantially underestimate the prevalence of hallucinations.

Related papers

• NovGauge: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Diagnosing LLMs' Capability in Paper Novelty Assessment [54.4265627247104]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in peer review at major AI conferences.<n>Existing benchmarks assess novelty as a single holistic score.<n>We present NovGauge, a human-anchored benchmark for fine-grained novelty assessment diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T08:34:56Z)
• Detecting Hallucinations in Retrieval-Augmented Generation through Grounding-Aware Sensitivity by Perturbation (GASP) [1.827510863075184]
  Grounding-Aware Sensitivity by Perturbation (GASP) is a span-level detector that scores each answer sentence by how strongly its likelihood depends on the retrieved evidence.<n>GASP holds the answer fixed and re-scores it under the full context, under no context, and with each chunk removed, then measures the log-likelihood drops and Jensen-Shannon divergences.<n>We evaluate GASP on three benchmarks (RAGTruth, TofuEval, RAGBench) with three instruction-tuned scorers from two model families.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-05T10:35:30Z)
• One Reflection Is Not Enough: Self-Correcting Autonomous Research via Multi-Hypothesis Failure Attribution [85.65263343588026]
  We propose SAGE, a Self-correcting, Autonomous, Grounded Experimenter.<n>Its core mechanism, Multi-Hypothesis Failure Attribution (MHFA), treats recovery as a structured causal diagnosis.<n>On a 12-topic, 5-domain benchmark, SAGE increases metrics-bearing outputs from 42% to 92% over a baseline reflection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-30T10:54:16Z)
• AbstRAG: Learning to Abstract for Retrieval Problems [23.379898867224355]
  AbstRAG decomposes the query--evidence gap into expression, conceptual, intent--evidence, and event-type components.<n>It outperforms on nDCG@10 in 18 of 21 paired-bootstrap contrasts and improves generation accuracy by 1.9%, 5.2%, and 4.0%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-08T13:14:01Z)
• What Do Claim Verification Datasets Actually Test? A Reasoning Trace Analysis [34.429649156970015]
  We generate structured reasoning traces for 24K claim-verification examples using GPT-4o-mini.<n>We find that direct evidence extraction dominates, while multi-sentence synthesis and numerical reasoning are severely under-represented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-02T05:54:51Z)
• Mitigating LLM Hallucinations through Domain-Grounded Tiered Retrieval [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved unprecedented fluency but remain susceptible to "hallucinations"<n>We propose a tiered retrieval and verification architecture designed to intercept factual inaccuracies by shifting LLMs from pattern-matchers to verified truth-seekers.<n>System was evaluated across 650 queries from five diverse benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-18T15:59:30Z)
• ConsistentRFT: Reducing Visual Hallucinations in Flow-based Reinforcement Fine-Tuning [85.20505958752928]
  Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) on flow-based models is crucial for preference alignment.<n>RFT often introduce visual hallucinations like over-optimized details and semantic misalignment.<n>This work preliminarily explores why visual hallucinations arise and how to reduce them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T11:49:46Z)
• VIRO: Robust and Efficient Neuro-Symbolic Reasoning with Verification for Referring Expression Comprehension [51.76841625486355]
  Referring Expression (REC) aims to localize the image region corresponding to a natural-language query.<n>Recent neuro-symbolic REC approaches leverage large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs) to perform compositional reasoning.<n>We introduce VIRO, a neuro-symbolic framework that embeds lightweight operator-level verifiers within reasoning steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T07:21:19Z)
• FVA-RAG: Falsification-Verification Alignment for Mitigating Sycophantic Hallucinations [0.0]
  Falsification-Verification Alignment RAG (FVA-RAG) is a framework that shifts the retrieval paradigm from Inductive Verification (seeking support) to Deductive Falsification (seeking disproof)<n>We introduce a dual-verification mechanism that explicitly weighs the draft answer against this "Anti-Context"<n>Preliminary experiments on a dataset of common misconceptions demonstrate that FVA-RAG significantly improves robustness against sycophantic hallucinations compared to standard RAG baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T21:28:42Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Faithfulness-Aware Uncertainty Quantification for Fact-Checking the Output of Retrieval Augmented Generation [108.13261761812517]
  We introduce FRANQ (Faithfulness-based Retrieval Augmented UNcertainty Quantification), a novel method for hallucination detection in RAG outputs.<n>We present a new long-form Question Answering (QA) dataset annotated for both factuality and faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T11:56:59Z)
• Retrieval is Not Enough: Enhancing RAG Reasoning through Test-Time Critique and Optimization [58.390885294401066]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has become a widely adopted paradigm for enabling knowledge-grounded large language models (LLMs)<n>RAG pipelines often fail to ensure that model reasoning remains consistent with the evidence retrieved, leading to factual inconsistencies or unsupported conclusions.<n>We propose AlignRAG, a novel iterative framework grounded in Critique-Driven Alignment (CDA)<n>We introduce AlignRAG-auto, an autonomous variant that dynamically terminates refinement, removing the need to pre-specify the number of critique iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T04:56:47Z)
• HalluCounter: Reference-free LLM Hallucination Detection in the Wild! [6.5037356041929675]
  HalluCounter is a reference-free hallucination detection method that utilizes both response-response and query-response consistency and alignment patterns.<n>Our method outperforms state-of-the-art approaches by a significant margin, achieving over 90% average confidence in hallucination detection across datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T16:59:18Z)
• FactCHD: Benchmarking Fact-Conflicting Hallucination Detection [64.4610684475899]
  FactCHD is a benchmark designed for the detection of fact-conflicting hallucinations from LLMs. FactCHD features a diverse dataset that spans various factuality patterns, including vanilla, multi-hop, comparison, and set operation. We introduce Truth-Triangulator that synthesizes reflective considerations by tool-enhanced ChatGPT and LoRA-tuning based on Llama2.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T16:27:49Z)

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.