arXiv preprint ·
When Ground Truth Is Not Ground Truth: Automatic Labeling for Hallucination Detection
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs) remain a major challenge, as they can produce misleading, factually incorrect, or unverifiable information, thereby undermining their trustworthiness and reliability. However, reliable ground-truth labels remain a key challenge in evaluating hallucination detectors. Recent studies often construct labels automatically by comparing model generations with reference answers using similarity metrics such as BLEURT. This implicitly treats BLEURT similarity as a proxy for hallucination, despite its English-centric supervision, unbounded score range, and design as a similarity metric rather than a factuality measure, making threshold-based ground-truth construction potentially unreliable. Through comprehensive experiments using 15 automatic supervision judges, seven hallucination detection baselines, two generator models, two QA datasets, and five languages, we demonstrate that detector performance varies substantially with the choice of supervision judge. Human validation reveals substantial differences in labeling reliability, with QGen-9B achieving the lowest overall misclassification rate (12.86%), while BLEURT and BLEURT-n exhibit rates of 47.23% and 47.32%, respectively. Our findings highlight the limitations of automatic similarity-based labeling and the need for more reliable judging methods that better capture semantic and factual correctness.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
Swapping the Judge Changes the Ranking: A Preregistered Study of Cross-Provider Replication in LLM-Judged System Comparisons
How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation
Same Rule, Different Verdicts: Rubric Language and Clause Structure in LLM Judges for Korean Support Dialogues
Phonological Knowledge of Chinese Characters in Language Models
When Strong Reasoners Join the Pool: Small Union Premiums and Costly Runaway Generations in LLM Routing
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.