Slow-thinking Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong reasoning capabilities but often suffer from severe hallucinations due to an inability to recognize their knowledge boundaries. Existing Reinforcement Learning (RL) approaches typically rely on outcome-oriented rewards, which can inadvertently reinforce fabricated reasoning paths when the final answer is correct. To address this, we propose **Know**ledge-enhanced **RL**, **KnowRL**, a framework that integrates factual supervision directly into the reasoning process. By decomposing the chain of thought into atomic facts and verifying them against the corresponding ground-truth knowledge, KnowRL performs fine-grained checks to encourage models to reason faithfully. Crucially, this process-oriented supervision teaches the model to identify its knowledge boundaries, learning to say "I don’t know" instead of fabricating answers when information is missing. Experimental results demonstrate that KnowRL effectively mitigates hallucinations—reducing the Incorrect Rate on SimpleQA by 20.3% for distillation-based slow-thinking models while maintaining strong performance on complex reasoning benchmarks like GPQA and AIME 2025. Furthermore, our method shows robust transferability to out-of-distribution tasks, indicating that the model learns a generalizable verification behavior.
论文检索
输入标题、作者或关键词，从 1,386 篇学术成果中精准定位
Hallucination remains a critical bottleneck for large language models (LLMs), undermining their reliability in real-world applications, especially in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems. While existing hallucination detection methods employ LLM-as-a-judge to verify LLM outputs against retrieved evidence, they suffer from inherent *confirmation bias*, where the verifier inadvertently reproduces the errors of the original generation. To address this, we introduce **M**ulti-**A**gent **R**einforced self-**C**heck for **H**allucination (MARCH), a framework that enforces rigorous factual alignment by leveraging deliberate *information asymmetry*. MARCH orchestrates a collaborative pipeline of three specialized agents: a Solver, a Proposer, and a Checker. The Solver generates an initial RAG response, which the Proposer decomposes into claim-level verifiable atomic propositions. Crucially, the Checker validates these propositions against retrieved evidence in isolation, deprived of the Solver’s original output. This well-crafted information asymmetry scheme breaks the cycle of self-confirmation bias. By training this pipeline with multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL), we enable the agents to co-evolve and optimize factual adherence. Extensive experiments across hallucination benchmarks demonstrate that MARCH substantially reduces hallucination rates. Notably, an 8B-parameter LLM equipped with MARCH achieves performance competitive with powerful closed-source models. MARCH paves a scalable path for factual self-improvement of LLMs through co-evolution. The code is at https://github.com/Qwen-Applications/MARCH.
Knowledge Injection Exists in MoE? Exploring Expert-Aware Contrast Decoding in MoE for Mitigating LLMs’ Hallucinations
PDF ↗Existing LLM hallucination mitigation methods, including prompt engineering and model optimization, either hardly alter models’ internal knowledge or have poor cross-domain generalization. Contrastive decoding mitigates hallucinations by using layer-wise differences in LLMs. However, prior studies only explore transformer-based models (e.g., GPT), ignoring other effective frameworks like mixture-of-experts (MoE) models. Since MoE alters the traditional transformer architecture, we conduct empirical studies to investigate whether similar layer-wise differences exist in MoEs. Our results show that they do not exist in MoE with shared experts; nevertheless, across different MoEs, higher layers exhibit distinct expert activation patterns between factual and non-factual outputs. Building on these, we propose EAACD, an expert-aware adaptive contrast decoding that uses expert differences in MoE’s higher layers to mitigate hallucinations on QA tasks. EAACD splits high-layer experts into a higher-reliability group and several lower-reliability groups based on their confidence and consistency. It contrasts the higher-reliability group’s prediction with each lower-reliability group’s prediction to calibrate the model’s original predictions. To strengthen this contrast, EAACD amplifies hallucinations from lower-reliability experts via attention and masking to provide stronger negative references. EAACD outperforms all baselines on four datasets
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in high-stakes domains such as finance, healthcare, and education, where reliable multi-turn interactions with users are essential. However, existing work on confidence estimation and calibration, a major approach to building trustworthy LLM systems, largely focuses on single-turn settings and overlooks the risks and potential of multi-turn conversations. In this work, we introduce the task of multi-turn calibration to reframe calibration from a static property into a dynamic challenge central to reliable multi-turn conversation, where calibrating model confidence at each turn conditioned on the conversation history is required. We first reveal the risks of this setting: using Expected Calibration Error at turn T (ECE@T), a new metric that tracks calibration dynamics over turns, we show that user feedback (e.g., persuasion) can degrade multi-turn calibration. To address this, we propose MTCal, which minimises ECE@T via a surrogate calibration target, and further leverage calibrated confidence in ConfChat, a decoding strategy that improves both factuality and consistency of the model response in multi-turn interactions. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MTCal achieves outstanding and consistent performance in multi-turn calibration, and ConfChat preserves and even enhances model performance in multi-turn interactions. Our results mark multi-turn calibration as one missing link for scaling LLM calibration toward safe, reliable, and real-world use. The code is available at: https://github.com/petezone/Multiturn-Calibration.
Vocabulary Hijacking in LVLMs: Unveiling Critical Attention Heads by Excluding Inert Tokens to Mitigate Hallucination
PDF ↗Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in multimodal tasks, yet their reliability is persistently undermined by hallucinations—generating text that contradicts visual input. Recent studies often attribute these errors to inadequate visual attention. In this work, we analyze the attention mechanisms via the logit lens, uncovering a distinct anomaly we term **Vocabulary Hijacking**. We discover that specific visual tokens, defined as **Inert Tokens**, disproportionately attract attention. Crucially, when their intermediate hidden states are projected into the vocabulary space, they consistently decode to a fixed set of unrelated words (termed **Hijacking Anchors**) across layers, revealing a rigid semantic collapse. Leveraging this semantic rigidity, we propose **Hijacking Anchor-Based Identification (HABI)**, a robust strategy to accurately localize these Inert Tokens. To quantify the impact of this phenomenon, we introduce the **Non-Hijacked Visual Attention Ratio (NHAR)**, a novel metric designed to identify attention heads that remain resilient to hijacking and are critical for factual accuracy. Building on these insights, we propose **Hijacking-Aware Visual Attention Enhancement (HAVAE)**, a training-free intervention that selectively strengthens the focus of these identified heads on salient visual content. Extensive experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that HAVAE significantly mitigates hallucinations with **no additional computational overhead**, while preserving the model’s general capabilities.
CAMEC: Complexity-Aware Multi-Expert Collaboration for Reliable Chinese Medical Question Answering
PDF ↗Large language models (LLMs) are promising for medical question answering (QA) but remain unreliable in Chinese clinical settings due to hallucinations, weak factual grounding, and difficulty handling clinically complex cases. We propose CAMEC (Complexity-Aware Multi-Expert Collaboration), a framework that combines hierarchical medical adaptation with complexity-aware expert routing for reliable Chinese medical QA. We adopt a three-stage LoRA-based supervised fine-tuning pipeline for domain adaptation, instruction following, and clinical reasoning. At inference, CAMEC routes each query by predicted complexity and selectively recruits three experts: an internal chain-of-thought (CoT) expert, a retrieval-augmented expert over a dense medical vector database, and a knowledge graph (KG) expert over a structured medical knowledge base. An LLM-as-a-Judge module evaluates and critiques expert reports, iteratively refining them into a consensus answer. Experiments on four Chinese medical benchmarks show that CAMEC consistentlyoutperforms strong general and medical LLM baselines, achieving 78.86% (CMExam), 84.15% (MedQA-CN), 78.51% (CMMLU-Med), and 74.40% (CMB-exam), with consistent absolute improvements over the previous state-of-the-artHuatuoGPT-o1-7B across all benchmarks. The complexity-aware router reduces expert invocations and inference cost, making CAMEC both highly effective and computationally efficient.
Reasoning Language Models (RLMs) have significantly improved performance on complex tasks by extending the reasoning chain. However, these chains are prone to containing factual errors, particularly in knowledge-intensive tasks. To address this issue, we propose **CheckRLM**, a framework that improves the reliability of the reasoning process through Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) by timely checking and correcting factual errors. Specifically, CheckRLM extracts factual claims from the reasoning chain to identify and localize subtle knowledge inconsistencies during inference. Upon detection of errors, a refinement mechanism performs minimal-cost yet precise corrections by leveraging external knowledge, ensuring coherence between the reasoning chain and correct knowledge. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CheckRLM substantially outperforms existing baselines, exhibiting a strong capability to mitigate error accumulation in long-horizon reasoning with lower costs. The code and data are available at https://github.com/AI9Stars/CheckRLM.
Cross-Examination Framework: A Task-Agnostic Diagnostic for Information Fidelity in Text-to-Text Generation
PDF ↗Traditional metrics like BLEU and BERTScore fail to capture semantic fidelity in generative text-to-text tasks. We adapt the Cross-Examination Framework (CEF) for a reference-free, multi-dimensional evaluation by treating the source and candidate as independent knowledge bases. CEF generates verifiable questions from each text and performs a cross-examination to derive three interpretable scores: Coverage, Conformity, and Consistency. Validated across translation, summarization and clinical note-generation, our framework identifies critical errors, such as content omissions and factual contradictions, missed by standard metrics. A key contribution is a systematic robustness analysis to select a stable judge model. Crucially, the strong correlation between our reference-free and with-reference modes validates CEF’s reliability without gold references. Furthermore, human expert validation demonstrates that CEF mismatching questions align with meaning-altering semantic errors higher than with non-semantic errors, particularly excelling at identifying entity-based and relational distortions.
Graph-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) advances flat document retrieval by structuring knowledge as relational graphs, enabling more coherent and effective reasoning. However, applying it to specific domains like legal reasoning faces critical challenges. (i) Legal corpora are heterogeneous, containing multi-granular knowledge from cases, articles and interpretations. A flat knowledge graph cannot adequately differentiate between factual details, applied rules, and abstract principles, limiting accurate retrieval. (ii) Reliable legal judgment demands transparent, evidence-based reasoning. Traditional RAG passes retrieved context directly to an LLM without verification, resulting in opaque, error-prone reasoning. To this end, we propose LegalGraphRAG, a framework designed for reliable legal reasoning. Our approach introduces two core components: a hierarchical legal graph that hierarchically organizes legal sources to enable retrieval at appropriate abstraction levels, and a multi-agent system for reliable legal reasoning, where a Researcher retrieves candidate evidence, an Auditor rigorously verifies its validity against source documents, and an Adjudicator synthesizes the set of verified evidence to render a final judgment. Extensive experiments show that LegalGraphRAG achieves the state-of-the-art performance, outperforming existing GraphRAG baselines in accurate and trustworthy legal analysis. Our code, datasets and implementation details are available at https://github.com/XMUDeepLIT/LegalGraphRAG.
Contextual causal reasoning is a critical yet challenging capability for Large Language Models (LLMs). Existing benchmarks, however, often evaluate this skill in fragmented settings, failing to ensure context consistency or cover the full causal hierarchy. To address this, we pioneer METER to systematically benchmark LLMs across all three levels of the causal ladder under a unified context setting. Our extensive evaluation of various LLMs reveals a significant decline in proficiency as tasks ascend the causal hierarchy. To diagnose this degradation, we conduct a deep mechanistic analysis via both error pattern identification and internal information flow tracing. Our analysis reveals two primary failure modes: (1) LLMs are susceptible to distraction by causally irrelevant but factually correct information at lower level of causality; and (2) as tasks ascend the causal hierarchy, faithfulness to the provided context degrades, leading to a reduced performance. We belive our work advances our understanding of the mechanisms behind LLM contextual causal reasoning and establishes a critical foundation for future research. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/SCUNLP/METER.
Reasoning While Asking: Transforming Reasoning Large Language Models from Passive Solvers to Proactive Inquirers
PDF ↗Reasoning-oriented Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, yet they remain fundamentally limited by a blind self-thinking paradigm: performing extensive internal reasoning even when critical information is missing or ambiguous. We propose Proactive Interactive Reasoning (PIR), a new reasoning paradigm that transforms LLMs from passive solvers into proactive inquirers that interleave reasoning with clarification. Unlike existing search- or tool-based frameworks that primarily address knowledge uncertainty by querying external environments, PIR targets premise- and intent-level uncertainty through direct interaction with the user. PIR is implemented via two core components: (1) an uncertainty-aware supervised fine-tuning procedure that equips models with interactive reasoning capability, and (2) a user-simulator-based policy optimization framework driven by a composite reward that aligns model behavior with user intent. Extensive experiments on mathematical reasoning, code generation, and document editing demonstrate that PIR consistently outperforms strong baselines, achieving up to 32.70% higher accuracy, 22.90% higher pass rate, and 41.36 BLEU improvement, while reducing nearly half of the reasoning computation and unnecessary interaction turns. Further reliability evaluations on factual knowledge, question answering, and missing-premise scenarios confirm the strong generalization and robustness of PIR.
Large Language Models based Table Question Answering (LLMs-based TableQA) models excel in NLP field, however, they occasionally exhibit an unfaithful behavior where correct answers are derived through erroneous reasoning paths. In this condition, we propose TrustTable, a neuro-symbolic framework designed to ensure reasoning faithfulness by auditing the reasoning processes of LLMs. Unlike monolithic LLM-based auditors, TrustTable decouples the auditing operation into two orthogonal dimensions. It enforces factual grounding by executing neurally generated Pandas code against the table, and ensures logical soundness by verifying reasoning chains through a LLM-synthesized formal solver. By integrating these symbolic checks, TrustTable enables a Label-Free Audit Loop that systematically identifies and rectifies reasoning flaws without human supervision. In addition, we present the TrustTable-Bench, a diagnostic dataset containing diverse error categories that range from calculation discrepancies to schema misalignments. This benchmark allows for a rigorous quantification of reasoning limitations. Experiments demonstrate that our symbolic audit detects reasoning flaws more accurately than advanced baselines. More broadly, the TrustTable outperforms LLM judges in both majority voting with logical weighting and rejection sampling with process supervision.
Memory systems for LLM agents struggle to determine what information deserves retention. Existing approaches rely on predefined heuristics such as importance scores, emotional tags, or factual templates, encoding designer intuition rather than learning from the data itself. Inspired by cognitive ideas, we propose Nemori, an adaptive memory distillation framework that casts the assessment of the experience’s future utility as a matter of predictability. Specifically, Nemori comprises two cascading modules: Episodic Memory Integration transforms raw interactions into coherent narratives, and Semantic Knowledge Distillation extracts insights via prediction error. Centering on distillation, the framework remains agnostic to downstream management. Extensive experiments confirm that Nemori achieves strong performance, efficiency, and storage reduction. Our work suggests that observing the intrinsic properties of interaction sequences offers a viable, data-driven alternative to heuristic-based memory design.
Search-augmented LLM agents can produce deep research reports (DRRs), but verifying claim-level factuality remains challenging. Existing fact-checkers usually target general-domain atomic claims, and there is no benchmark to test whether such verifiers transfer to DRRs.Yet building such a benchmark for DRR fact-checkers is itself difficult because it requires expert judgments over cognitively demanding, domain-specific claims.In a controlled study with PhD-level specialists, unassisted experts achieve only 60.8% accuracy on hidden known-answer claims. We therefore propose evolving benchmarking via **Audit-then-Score** (**AtS**), in which labels and rationales remain revisable: when a verifier disagrees with the current benchmark, it submits evidence; an auditor adjudicates the dispute; and accepted revisions update the benchmark before scoring. After three additional **AtS** rounds, expert accuracy rises to 90.9%, showing that experts are better auditors than one-shot labelers.We instantiate **AtS** as **DeepFactBench**, a versioned DRR factuality benchmark with auditable rationales, and introduce **DeepFactEval**, a claim-level verifier.On the frozen **DeepFactBench** release, **DeepFactEval** achieves 83.4% accuracy, outperforming the best prior deep-research and traditional fact-checkers by 14.3 and 24.9 points, respectively, and transferring well to external factuality datasets.
Hallucination in large language models (LLMs) continues to be a significant issue, particularly in tasks like question answering, where models often generate plausible yet incorrect or irrelevant information. Although various methods have been proposed to mitigate hallucinations, the relationship between attention patterns and hallucinations has not been fully explored. In this paper, we analyze the distribution of attention scores across each layer and attention head of LLMs, revealing a common and intriguing phenomenon: Shallow layers of LLMs primarily rely on uniform attention patterns, where the model distributes its attention evenly across the entire sequence. This uniform attention pattern can lead to hallucinations, as the model fails to focus on the most relevant information. To mitigate this issue, we propose a training-free method called Attention Replacement Technique (ART), which replaces these uniform attention patterns in the shallow layers with local attention patterns. This change directs the model to focus more on the relevant contexts, thus reducing hallucinations. Through extensive experiments, ART demonstrates significant reductions in hallucinations across multiple LLM architectures, proving its effectiveness and generalizability without requiring fine-tuning or additional training data.
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has become a common practice in multimodal large language models (MLLM) to enhance factual grounding and reduce hallucination. Yet, its reliance on retrieval exposes MLLMs to knowledge poisoning attacks, in which adversaries deliberately inject malicious multimodal content into external knowledge bases to steer models toward generating incorrect or even harmful responses. We present MM-PoisonRAG, a framework to systematically study the vulnerability of multimodal RAG under knowledge poisoning. Specifically, we design two novel attack strategies: Localized Poisoning Attack (LPA), which implants targeted, query-specific multimodal misinformation to manipulate outputs toward attacker-controlled responses, and Globalized Poisoning Attack (GPA), which uses a single, untargeted adversarial injection to broadly corrupt reasoning and collapse generation quality across all queries. Extensive experiments on diverse tasks, multimodal RAG components, and attacker access levels reveal severe vulnerabilities: LPA achieves up to 56% attack success rate even under restricted access, and transfers effectively across four different retrievers without re-optimizing the adversaries. GPA completely disrupts model generation to 0% accuracy with just one poisoned content. Moreover, both LPA and GPA bypass existing defenses, underscoring the fragility of multimodal RAG and establishing MM-PoisonRAG as a foundation for future research on securing RAG frameworks against multimodal knowledge poisoning.
We propose VC-Inspector, a lightweight, open-source large multimodal model (LMM) for reference-free evaluation of video captions, with a focus on factual accuracy. Unlike existing metrics that suffer from limited context handling, weak factuality assessment, or reliance on proprietary services, VC-Inspector offers a reproducible, fact-aware alternative that aligns closely with human judgments. To enable robust training and interpretable evaluation, we introduce a systematic approach for generating captions with controllable errors, paired with graded quality scores and explanatory annotations. Experiments show that VC-Inspector achieves state-of-the-art correlation with human judgments, generalizing across diverse domains (e.g., VATEX-Eval, Flickr8K-Expert, and Flickr8K-CF benchmarks) and revealing the potential for caption improvement.
Hallucination remains a major challenge for the safe and trustworthy deployment of large language models (LLMs) in factual content generation. Prior work has explored confidence estimation as an effective approach to hallucination detection, but often relies on post-hoc self-consistency methods that require computationally expensive sampling. Verbalized confidence offers a more efficient alternative, but existing approaches are largely limited to short-form question answering (QA) tasks and do not generalize well to open-ended generation. In this paper, we propose LoVeC (Long-form Verbalized Confidence), a novel reinforcement learning (RL)–based method that trains LLMs to append an on-the-fly numerical confidence score to each generated statement during long-form generation. The confidence score serves as a direct and interpretable signal of the factuality of generation. We introduce two evaluation settings, free-form tagging and iterative tagging, to assess different verbalized confidence estimation methods. Experiments on three long-form QA datasets show that our RL-trained models achieve better calibration and generalize robustly across domains. Also, our method is highly efficient, being 20 \times faster than traditional self-consistency methods while achieving better calibration.
Large Language Models (LLMs) often produce texts that appear coherent and credible, even when their factual reliability is uncertain. This paper investigates whether such perceived credibility correlates with the pervasive use of generics—generalizations without explicit quantification. We introduce a text-level genericity score derived from clause-level annotations and apply it to argumentative essays produced by humans and LLMs. To analyze how generics are realized in discourse, we employ Rhetorical Structure Theory to examine coherence relations across varying levels of genericity. Results show that according to our genericity metric, human texts are less generic than LLM-produced texts. As regards discourse, higher genericity correlates with less structured, paratactic structures, while for some models coherence is maintained through elaboration relations. Our findings suggest that some LLMs maintain well-structured coherence even in highly generic texts, which might enable them to "camouflage" argumentative texts as informative, enhancing their perceived credibility and persuasiveness.
StratMem-Bench: Evaluating Strategic Memory Use in Virtual Character Conversation Beyond Factual Recall
PDF ↗Achieving realistic human-like conversation for virtual characters requires not only a simple memorization and recall of past events, but also the strategic utilization of memory to meet factual needs and social engagement. Current memory utilization relevant (e.g., memory-augmented generation, long-term dialogue, and etc.) benchmarks overlook this nuance, treating memory primarily as a static repository of facts rather than a dynamic resource to be strategically deployed in dialogues. To address this gap, we design StratMem-Bench, a new benchmark to evaluate strategic memory use in character-centric dialogues. This dataset comprises 657 instances where virtual characters must navigate heterogeneous memory pools containing required, supportive, and irrelevant memories. We also propose a framework with different evaluation metrics including Strict Memory Compliance, Memory Integration Quality, Proactive Enrichment Score and Conditional Irrelevance Rate, and to evaluate strategic memory use capabilities of virtual characters. Experiments on StratMem-Bench which leverage the state-of-the-art large language models as virtual characters show that all models perform well at distinguishing between required and irrelevant memories, but struggle once supportive memories are introduced into the decision process.