Zero Hallucination, by Construction: Hallucination-Aware Layered Oversight for Trustworthy Enterprise AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.17883v1
• Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 12:34:44 GMT
• Title: Zero Hallucination, by Construction: Hallucination-Aware Layered Oversight for Trustworthy Enterprise AI
• Abstract summary: We argue that "zero hallucination" is not a property a model possesses but a property a system enforces.<n>We present HALO, an assurance architecture which treats hallucination as a containable failure mode rather than an eliminable one.
• Score: 39.17006317116773
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Enterprises will not deploy AI agents they cannot trust, and the most-cited reason for distrust is hallucination: confident, fluent output that is simply not true. The common response is to wait for a model that does not hallucinate. We argue that this is the wrong target. Large language models are, by construction, capable of generating unsupported text, and no amount of scale removes the possibility; a faithfulness judge bolted onto a raw model catches some errors but still ships others, and even well-curated retrieval pipelines have been shown to fabricate citations. We reframe the goal: "zero hallucination" is not a property a model possesses but a property a system enforces. We present HALO (Hallucination-Aware Layered Oversight), an assurance architecture which treats hallucination as a containable failure mode rather than an eliminable one. HALO composes six layers of defense: grounded generation over retrieved, approved content; constrained, deterministic execution that bounds where the model can err; multi-signal verification that scores every output for groundedness and hallucination using both an LLM judge and evidence-based checks against the source text; calibrated abstention, so the system declines rather than guesses when grounding is insufficient; total traceability of every retrieval, tool call, and generation; and continuous oversight that detects drift, alerts on threshold breaches, and closes the loop by regenerating and statistically validating improved agents. We detail each layer, give particular attention to evidence-based confidence (which verifies extractions against the source document rather than trusting the model's self-reported certainty), and illustrate the architecture on a regulated claims-extraction workload

Related papers

• The LLM Proposes, the Executive Disposes: A Self-Verifying Agent Instrument that Dissociates Commitment Drift from Binding Drift in Long-Horizon Agents [0.0]
  We present an agent instrument built so that verification is structural rather than post-hoc.<n>Every run invalidates itself when per-organ write-error, render-size, or salted-canary-echo floors are breached.<n>We report a clean, single-variable result on a failure every long-horizon agent suffers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T15:10:37Z)
• Reality Monitoring in Large Language Models: Self-Knowledge That Transforms with Conversation Memory [0.0]
  We show that source attribution depends on how conversational memory is structured.<n>This suggests that as AI systems take on autonomous, multi-turn roles, evaluating what they know is not enough.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-27T01:47:12Z)
• Building Reliable Long-Form Generation via Hallucination Rejection Sampling [26.68294442366694]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in open-ended text generation, yet they remain prone to hallucinating incorrect or unsupported content.<n>We propose a novel inference-time hallucination mitigation framework, named Segment-wise HAllucination Rejection Sampling (SHARS)<n>SHARS uses an arbitrary hallucination detector to identify and reject hallucinated segments during generation and resample until faithful content is produced.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T13:26:17Z)
• Countering the Over-Reliance Trap: Mitigating Object Hallucination for LVLMs via a Self-Validation Framework [35.29785249891566]
  Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) generate descriptions of non-existent objects, compromising their reliability.<n>Previous work attributes this to LVLMs' over-reliance on language priors and attempts to mitigate it through logits calibration.<n>We propose Language-Prior-Free Verification to enable LVLMs to faithfully verify the confidence of object existence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T01:37:53Z)
• Incentives or Ontology? A Structural Rebuttal to OpenAI's Hallucination Thesis [0.42970700836450487]
  We argue that hallucination is not an optimization failure but an architectural inevitability of the transformer model.<n>Our empirical results demonstrate that hallucination can only be eliminated through external truth-validation and abstention modules.<n>We conclude that hallucination is a structural property of generative architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-16T17:39:45Z)
• Auditing Meta-Cognitive Hallucinations in Reasoning Large Language Models [12.747507415841168]
  We study the causality of hallucinations under constrained knowledge domains by auditing the Chain-of-Thought trajectory.<n>Our analysis reveals that in long-CoT settings, RLLMs can iteratively reinforce biases and errors through flawed reflective reasoning.<n>Surprisingly, even direct interventions at the origin of hallucinations often fail to reverse their effects, as reasoning chains exhibit 'chain disloyalty'
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T14:11:09Z)
• HalluLens: LLM Hallucination Benchmark [49.170128733508335]
  Large language models (LLMs) often generate responses that deviate from user input or training data, a phenomenon known as "hallucination"<n>This paper introduces a comprehensive hallucination benchmark, incorporating both new extrinsic and existing intrinsic evaluation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-24T13:40:27Z)
• Generate, but Verify: Reducing Hallucination in Vision-Language Models with Retrospective Resampling [78.78822033285938]
  Vision-Language Models (VLMs) excel at visual understanding but often suffer from visual hallucinations.<n>In this work, we introduce REVERSE, a unified framework that integrates hallucination-aware training with on-the-fly self-verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T17:59:22Z)
• The Law of Knowledge Overshadowing: Towards Understanding, Predicting, and Preventing LLM Hallucination [85.18584652829799]
  We introduce a novel framework to quantify factual hallucinations by modeling knowledge overshadowing.<n>We propose a new decoding strategy CoDa, to mitigate hallucinations, which notably enhance model factuality on Overshadow (27.9%), MemoTrap (13.1%) and NQ-Swap (18.3%)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-22T08:36:06Z)
• Trust Me, I'm Wrong: LLMs Hallucinate with Certainty Despite Knowing the Answer [51.7407540261676]
  We investigate a distinct type of hallucination, where a model can consistently answer a question correctly, but a seemingly trivial perturbation causes it to produce a hallucinated response with high certainty.<n>This phenomenon is particularly concerning in high-stakes domains such as medicine or law, where model certainty is often used as a proxy for reliability.<n>We show that CHOKE examples are consistent across prompts, occur in different models and datasets, and are fundamentally distinct from other hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T15:46:31Z)
• Don't Say What You Don't Know: Improving the Consistency of Abstractive Summarization by Constraining Beam Search [54.286450484332505]
  We analyze the connection between hallucinations and training data, and find evidence that models hallucinate because they train on target summaries that are unsupported by the source. We present PINOCCHIO, a new decoding method that improves the consistency of a transformer-based abstractive summarizer by constraining beam search to avoid hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-16T07:13:52Z)

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.