Teaching Language Models to Check Grounded Claim Factuality with Human Test-Taking Strategies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.29712v1
• Date: Thu, 28 May 2026 10:11:42 GMT
• Title: Teaching Language Models to Check Grounded Claim Factuality with Human Test-Taking Strategies
• Abstract summary: Grounded claim factuality checking is important for large language model (LLM) applications such as retrieval-augmented generation.<n>We address this by formulating grounded claim factuality checking as a true/false reading comprehension task.<n>Our method reduces token usage by over 80% compared to unguided open-ended reasoning.
• Score: 0.9867902290081937
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Grounded claim factuality checking is important for large language model (LLM) applications such as retrieval-augmented generation, as it helps users assess the correctness of generated outputs. Existing metrics using entailment classifiers require dataset-specific threshold tuning, while LLM-based approaches often use direct prompting, which underutilises the reasoning capabilities of LLMs. We address this by formulating grounded claim factuality checking as a true/false reading comprehension task and prompting LLMs with explicit test-taking strategies for efficient reasoning. Our method reduces token usage by over 80% compared to unguided open-ended reasoning, and achieves competitive performance to more expensive alternatives across two factuality benchmarks, setting a new state of the art on one. To further reduce inference cost, we train small language models (SLMs) to replace LLMs in the checking pipeline. Using supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and a self-revision mechanism, the SLMs learn to improve their factuality judgements. Experimental results show that the resulting SLMs perform on par with strong baselines, combining low inference costs with generating supporting rationales to support interpretability. Code and datasets will be released upon acceptance.

Related papers

• LLM-Specific Utility: A New Perspective for Retrieval-Augmented Generation [110.610512800947]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by incorporating external knowledge.<n>Existing studies often treat utility as a generic attribute, ignoring the fact that different LLMs may benefit differently from the same passage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T12:57:45Z)
• RJE: A Retrieval-Judgment-Exploration Framework for Efficient Knowledge Graph Question Answering with LLMs [18.947344953344995]
  Retrieval-Judgment-Exploration (RJE) is a framework that retrieves refined reasoning paths, evaluates their sufficiency, and conditionally explores additional evidence.<n> RJE substantially reduces the number of LLM calls and token usage compared to agent-based methods, yielding significant efficiency improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T03:56:18Z)
• Efficiency-Effectiveness Reranking FLOPs for LLM-based Rerankers [17.658542084440082]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been applied to reranking tasks in information retrieval, achieving strong performance.<n>Existing studies evaluate the efficiency of LLM-based rerankers using proxy metrics such as latency, the number of forward passes, input tokens, and output tokens.<n>We propose RPP (ranking metrics per PetaFLOP), measuring how much ranking quality (e.g., NDCG or MRR) a method achieves per PetaFLOP, and QPP (queries per PetaFLOP), measuring how many queries can be processed per PetaFLOP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-08T17:56:28Z)
• Verifying the Verifiers: Unveiling Pitfalls and Potentials in Fact Verifiers [59.168391398830515]
  We evaluate 12 pre-trained LLMs and one specialized fact-verifier, using a collection of examples from 14 fact-checking benchmarks.<n>We highlight the importance of addressing annotation errors and ambiguity in datasets.<n> frontier LLMs with few-shot in-context examples, often overlooked in previous works, achieve top-tier performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-16T10:32:10Z)
• Test-Time Learning for Large Language Models [33.11605667376906]
  We propose a Test-Time Learning (TTL) paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>LLMs dynamically adapts to target domains using only unlabeled test data during testing.<n>We demonstrate through experiments that TLM improves performance by at least 20% compared to original LLMs on domain knowledge adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T02:18:59Z)
• Provenance: A Light-weight Fact-checker for Retrieval Augmented LLM Generation Output [49.893971654861424]
  We present a light-weight approach for detecting nonfactual outputs from retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) We compute a factuality score that can be thresholded to yield a binary decision. Our experiments show high area under the ROC curve (AUC) across a wide range of relevant open source datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-01T20:44:59Z)
• $\forall$uto$\exists$val: Autonomous Assessment of LLMs in Formal Synthesis and Interpretation Tasks [21.12437562185667]
  This paper presents a new approach for scaling LLM assessment in translating formal syntax to natural language. We use context-free grammars (CFGs) to generate out-of-distribution datasets on the fly. We also conduct an assessment of several SOTA closed and open-source LLMs to showcase the feasibility and scalability of this paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T08:08:00Z)
• Log Probabilities Are a Reliable Estimate of Semantic Plausibility in Base and Instruction-Tuned Language Models [50.15455336684986]
  We evaluate the effectiveness of LogProbs and basic prompting to measure semantic plausibility. We find that LogProbs offers a more reliable measure of semantic plausibility than direct zero-shot prompting. We conclude that, even in the era of prompt-based evaluations, LogProbs constitute a useful metric of semantic plausibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T22:08:44Z)
• 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)
• Reflection-Tuning: Data Recycling Improves LLM Instruction-Tuning [79.32236399694077]
  Low-quality data in the training set are usually detrimental to instruction tuning. We propose a novel method, termed "reflection-tuning" This approach utilizes an oracle LLM to recycle the original training data by introspecting and enhancing the quality of instructions and responses in the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T05:13:47Z)
• Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Model Knowledge [78.38870272050106]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been treated as knowledge bases due to their strong performance in knowledge probing tasks. How do we evaluate the capabilities of LLMs to consistently produce factually correct answers? We propose MOdel kNowledge relIabiliTy scORe (MONITOR), a novel metric designed to directly measure LLMs' factual reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T12:40:30Z)

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.