Cited by 15Natural Language Processing TechniquesTopic ModelingSpeech and dialogue systems

The Pitfalls of Defining Hallucination

Open access
Deemter, Kees van·2024·Computational Linguistics

Abstract

Despite impressive advances in Natural Language Generation (NLG) and Large Language Models (LLMs), researchers are still unclear about important aspects of NLG evaluation. To substantiate this claim, I examine current classifications of hallucination and omission in data-text NLG, and I propose a logic-based synthesis of these classfications. I conclude by highlighting some remaining limitations of all current thinking about hallucination and by discussing implications for LLMs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/coli_a_00509

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Koehn, Philipp and Rebecca Knowles. 2017. Six challenges for neural machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.03872. · arXiv
  2. Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deemter, K. V.
Affiliations
Utrecht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Deemter, Kees van
Venue
Computational Linguistics
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2024
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
807-816
ISSN
  • 0891-2017 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-9312
OpenAlex
W4391017628
Cited by
13
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3
FWCI
1.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computational Linguistics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
Keywords
hallucinations, omission, natural language generation evaluation, large language models

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review