Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive proficiency in information retrieval, while they are prone to generating incorrect responses that conflict with reality, a phenomenon known as intrinsic hallucination. The critical challenge lies in the unclear and unreliable fact distribution within LLMs trained on vast amounts of data. The prevalent approach frames the factual detection task as a question-answering paradigm, where the LLMs are asked about factual knowledge and examined for correctness. However, existing studies primarily focused on deriving test cases only from several specific domains, such as movies and sports, limiting the comprehensive observation of missing knowledge and the analysis of unexpected hallucinations. To address this issue, we propose OntoFact, an adaptive framework for detecting unknown facts of LLMs, devoted to mining the ontology-level skeleton of the missing knowledge. Specifically, we argue that LLMs could expose the ontology-based similarity among missing facts and introduce five representative knowledge graphs (KGs) as benchmarks. We further devise a sophisticated ontology-driven reinforcement learning (ORL) mechanism to produce error-prone test cases with specific entities and relations automatically. The ORL mechanism rewards the KGs for navigating toward a feasible direction for unveiling factual errors. Moreover, empirical efforts demonstrate that dominant LLMs are biased towards answering Yes rather than No, regardless of whether this knowledge is included. To mitigate the overconfidence of LLMs, we leverage a hallucination-free detection (HFD) strategy to tackle unfair comparisons between baselines, thereby boosting the result robustness. Experimental results on 5 datasets, using 32 representative LLMs, reveal a general lack of fact in current LLMs. Notably, ChatGPT exhibits fact error rates of 51.6% on DBpedia and 64.7% on YAGO, respectively. Additionally, the ORL mechanism demonstrates promising error prediction scores, with F1 scores ranging from 70% to 90% across most LLMs. Compared to the exhaustive testing, ORL achieves an average recall of 80% while reducing evaluation time by 35.29% to 63.12%.

He Thinks He Knows Better than the Doctors: BERT for Event Factuality Fails on Pragmatics

Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity

Language Models Hallucinate, but May Excel at Fact Verification

Neural models of factuality

FactBench: A Dynamic Benchmark for In-the-Wild Language Model Factuality Evaluation

Fact Recall, Heuristics or Pure Guesswork? Precise Interpretations of Language Models for Fact Completion

Exploring Factual Entailment with NLI: A News Media Study

Is Factuality Enhancement a Free Lunch For LLMs? Better Factuality Can Lead to Worse Context-Faithfulness

A fine-grained comparison of pragmatic language understanding in humans and language models

PRobELM: Plausibility Ranking Evaluation for Language Models

Investigating Factuality in Long-Form Text Generation: The Roles of Self-Known and Self-Unknown

Factual Confidence of LLMs: on Reliability and Robustness of Current Estimators

Do Large Language Models Know about Facts?

Beyond Factuality: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models as Knowledge Generators

The Earth is Flat? Unveiling Factual Errors in Large Language Models

OntoFact: Unveiling Fantastic Fact-Skeleton of LLMs Via Ontology-Driven Reinforcement Learning

Measuring text summarization factuality using atomic facts entailment metrics in the context of retrieval augmented generation

Ask to Know More: Generating Counterfactual Explanations for Fake Claims

Belief in the Machine: Investigating Epistemological Blind Spots of Language Models

FactTest: Factuality Testing in Large Language Models with Finite-Sample and Distribution-Free Guarantees

FELM: Benchmarking Factuality Evaluation of Large Language Models