TriQua: Reconciling Granularity and Context in Factuality Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.05228v1
• Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 12:22:28 GMT
• Title: TriQua: Reconciling Granularity and Context in Factuality Evaluation
• Abstract summary: We introduce TriQua, a framework that flexibly models facts based on their complexity.<n>Simple claims are extracted as standard triples, while complex claims are represented as hyperrelational facts.<n>We propose TriQuaScore to quantify the factuality of these structured fact units.
• Score: 4.287837378537226
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The "decompose-then-verify" paradigm for LLM factuality evaluation faces a fundamental trade-off: atomic facts, i.e., one sentence conveying one unit of information, often omit essential context, while broader statements lack the granularity needed for precise assessment. To address this, we introduce TriQua, a framework that flexibly models facts based on their complexity. Simple claims are extracted as standard triples, while complex claims are represented as hyperrelational facts by attaching auxiliary contextual qualifiers. This adaptive structure preserves the necessary context for accurate retrieval and verification without sacrificing atomicity. Furthermore, TriQua's verification process directly annotates concrete errors within specific triples and qualifiers, providing fine-grained explainability for error detection. Alongside the framework, we propose TriQuaScore to quantify the factuality of these structured fact units. Empirical evaluations show that TriQuaScore strongly aligns with human annotated factuality scores, TriQua achieves robust decomposition quality, and outperforms existing decomposition-based frameworks in evidence-based fact verification.

Related papers

• Evian: Towards Explainable Visual Instruction-tuning Data Auditing [14.93566912726999]
  We introduce a novel "Decomposition-then-Evaluation" paradigm that breaks model responses into constituent cognitive components.<n>We instantiate this paradigm via EVIAN, an automated framework that evaluates these components along the axes of Image-Text Consistency, Logical Coherence, and Factual Accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T13:28:27Z)
• Transforming External Knowledge into Triplets for Enhanced Retrieval in RAG of LLMs [55.78708003681562]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) mitigates hallucination in large language models (LLMs) by incorporating external knowledge during generation.<n>Existing RAG approaches typically retrieve and unstructured text fragments as context.<n>We propose Tri-RAG, a structured triplet-based retrieval framework that improves retrieval efficiency through reasoning-aligned context construction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-14T11:36:29Z)
• Uncertainty-Aware Web-Conditioned Scientific Fact-Checking [7.158918759352649]
  We present a pipeline centered on atomic predicate-argument decomposition and calibrated, uncertainty-gated corroboration.<n> atomic facts are aligned to local snippets via embeddings, verified by a compact evidence-grounded checker.<n>System supports both binary and tri-valued classification where it predicts labels from Supported, Refuted, NEI for three-way tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T06:01:20Z)
• Retrieve-Refine-Calibrate: A Framework for Complex Claim Fact-Checking [32.6738019397553]
  We propose a Retrieve-Refine-Calibrate (RRC) framework based on large language models (LLMs)<n>Specifically, the framework first identifies the entities mentioned in the claim and retrieves evidence relevant to them.<n>Then, it refines the retrieved evidence based on the claim to reduce irrelevant information.<n>Finally, it calibrates the verification process by re-evaluating low-confidence predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T08:48:52Z)
• Fact in Fragments: Deconstructing Complex Claims via LLM-based Atomic Fact Extraction and Verification [18.20994425756688]
  Atomic Fact Extraction and Verification (AFEV) is a novel framework that iteratively decomposes complex claims into atomic facts.<n>AFEV achieves state-of-the-art performance in both accuracy and interpretability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T05:49:43Z)
• Long-Form Information Alignment Evaluation Beyond Atomic Facts [60.25969380388974]
  We introduce MontageLie, a benchmark that constructs deceptive narratives by "montaging" truthful statements without introducing explicit hallucinations.<n>We propose DoveScore, a novel framework that jointly verifies factual accuracy and event-order consistency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-21T17:46:38Z)
• FactLens: Benchmarking Fine-Grained Fact Verification [6.814173254027381]
  We advocate for a shift towards fine-grained verification, where complex claims are broken down into smaller sub-claims for individual verification.<n>We introduce FactLens, a benchmark for evaluating fine-grained fact verification, with metrics and automated evaluators of sub-claim quality.<n>Our results show alignment between automated FactLens evaluators and human judgments, and we discuss the impact of sub-claim characteristics on the overall verification performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-08T21:26:57Z)
• Localizing Factual Inconsistencies in Attributable Text Generation [74.11403803488643]
  We introduce QASemConsistency, a new formalism for localizing factual inconsistencies in attributable text generation.<n>We show that QASemConsistency yields factual consistency scores that correlate well with human judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T22:53:48Z)
• FENICE: Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction [85.26780391682894]
  We propose Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction (FENICE) FENICE leverages an NLI-based alignment between information in the source document and a set of atomic facts, referred to as claims, extracted from the summary. Our metric sets a new state of the art on AGGREFACT, the de-facto benchmark for factuality evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T17:57:18Z)
• From Chaos to Clarity: Claim Normalization to Empower Fact-Checking [57.024192702939736]
  Claim Normalization (aka ClaimNorm) aims to decompose complex and noisy social media posts into more straightforward and understandable forms. We propose CACN, a pioneering approach that leverages chain-of-thought and claim check-worthiness estimation. Our experiments demonstrate that CACN outperforms several baselines across various evaluation measures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-22T16:07:06Z)
• 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)
• Interpretable Automatic Fine-grained Inconsistency Detection in Text Summarization [56.94741578760294]
  We propose the task of fine-grained inconsistency detection, the goal of which is to predict the fine-grained types of factual errors in a summary. Motivated by how humans inspect factual inconsistency in summaries, we propose an interpretable fine-grained inconsistency detection model, FineGrainFact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T22:11:47Z)
• Zero-shot Faithful Factual Error Correction [53.121642212060536]
  Faithfully correcting factual errors is critical for maintaining the integrity of textual knowledge bases and preventing hallucinations in sequence-to-sequence models. We present a zero-shot framework that formulates questions about input claims, looks for correct answers in the given evidence, and assesses the faithfulness of each correction based on its consistency with the evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-13T18:55:20Z)

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.