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%.

FLAME: Factuality-Aware Alignment for Large Language Models

Self-Alignment for Factuality: Mitigating Hallucinations in LLMs via Self-Evaluation

FactAlign: Long-form Factuality Alignment of Large Language Models

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

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

Aligning Large Multimodal Models with Factually Augmented RLHF

Beyond Under-Alignment: Atomic Preference Enhanced Factuality Tuning for Large Language Models

UAlign: Leveraging Uncertainty Estimations for Factuality Alignment on Large Language Models

Improving Factuality in Large Language Models via Decoding-Time Hallucinatory and Truthful Comparators

FGAIF: Aligning Large Vision-Language Models with Fine-grained AI Feedback

Mitigating Hallucinations of Large Language Models via Knowledge Consistent Alignment

Adaptive Activation Steering: A Tuning-Free LLM Truthfulness Improvement Method for Diverse Hallucinations Categories

Is Factuality Decoding a Free Lunch for LLMs? Evaluation on Knowledge Editing Benchmark

Drowzee: Metamorphic Testing for Fact-Conflicting Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models

Mitigating Large Language Model Hallucination with Faithful Finetuning

Learning to Trust Your Feelings: Leveraging Self-awareness in LLMs for Hallucination Mitigation

Language Models Hallucinate, but May Excel at Fact Verification

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

Knowledge Verification to Nip Hallucination in the Bud

On the Universal Truthfulness Hyperplane Inside LLMs

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