Retrieving Supporting Evidence for LLMs Generated Answers
Open accessAbstract
Current large language models (LLMs) can exhibit near-human levels of performance on many natural language tasks, including open-domain question answering. Unfortunately, they also convincingly hallucinate incorrect answers, so that responses to questions must be verified against external sources before they can be accepted at face value. In this paper, we report a simple experiment to automatically verify generated answers against a corpus. After presenting a question to an LLM and receiving a generated answer, we query the corpus with the combination of the question + generated answer. We then present the LLM with the combination of the question + generated answer + retrieved answer, prompting it to indicate if the generated answer can be supported by the retrieved answer. We base our experiment on questions and passages from the MS MARCO (V1) test collection, exploring three retrieval approaches ranging from standard BM25 to a full question answering stack, including a reader based on the LLM. For a large fraction of questions, we find that an LLM is capable of verifying its generated answer if appropriate supporting material is provided. However, with an accuracy of 70-80%, this approach cannot be fully relied upon to detect hallucinations.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Huo et al. improved the retrieval process through query expansion, combining the original question with the LLM-generated answer to address topic drift and ensure retrieved evidence aligns with both the question and the LLM's response.
“In addition to retrieving supporting evidence solely based on decomposited claims, Huo et al. [128] improved the retrieval process through query expansion. By combining the original question with the LLM-generated answer, they effectively addressed the issue of topic drift, ensuring that the retrieved evidence aligns with both the question and the LLM's response.”
From A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questions (2025) · cites this paper as [128]
The Methodology and §2.3 say Huo et al. combine the original question with the LLM-generated answer to retrieve passages relevant to the question and supportive of the answer. The Methodology links this approach to query-expansion methods that help avoid topic drift, but describes the alignment as a retrieval goal, not a guaranteed outcome or a demonstrated resolution of topic drift. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 4
Research works printed but not linked: 28
- Giambattista Amati, Claudio Carpineto, and Giovanni Romano. 2004. Query difficulty, robustness, and selective application of query expansion. In Advances in Information Retrieval: 26th European Conference on IR Research, ECIR 2004, Sunderland, UK, April 5-7, 2004. Proceedings 26. Springer, 127-137.
- Hiteshwar Kumar Azad and Akshay Deepak. 2019. Query expansion techniques for information retrieval: a survey. Information Processing & Management 56, 5 (2019), 1698-1735.
- Yejin Bang, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Nayeon Lee, Wenliang Dai, Dan Su, Bryan Wilie, Holy Lovenia, Ziwei Ji, Tiezheng Yu, Willy Chung, Quyet V. Do, Yan Xu, and Pascale Fung. 2023. A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity. arXiv:2302.04023 [cs.CL] · arXiv
- Bernd Bohnet, Vinh Q. Tran, Pat Verga, Roee Aharoni, Daniel Andor, Livio Baldini Soares, Massimiliano Ciaramita, Jacob Eisenstein, Kuzman Ganchev, Jonathan Herzig, Kai Hui, Tom Kwiatkowski, Ji Ma, Jianmo Ni, Lierni Sestorain Saralegui, Tal Schuster, William W. Cohen, Michael Collins, Dipanjan Das, Donald Metzler, Slav Petrov, and Kellie Webster. 2023. Attributed Question Answering: Evaluation and Modeling for Attributed Large Language Models. arXiv:2212.08037 [cs.CL] · arXiv
- Claudio Carpineto and Giovanni Romano. 2012. A survey of automatic query expansion in information retrieval. Acm Computing Surveys (CSUR) 44, 1 (2012), 1-50.
- Stephane Clinchant, Kweon Woo Jung, and Vassilina Nikoulina. 2019. On the use of BERT for neural machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.12744 (2019). · arXiv
- Thibault Formal, Carlos Lassance, Benjamin Piwowarski, and Stéphane Clinchant. 2021. SPLADE v2: Sparse Lexical and Expansion Model for Information Retrieval. arXiv:2109.10086 [cs.IR] · arXiv
- Luyu Gao, Zhuyun Dai, Panupong Pasupat, Anthony Chen, Arun Tejasvi Chaganty, Yicheng Fan, Vincent Y. Zhao, Ni Lao, Hongrae Lee, Da-Cheng Juan, and Kelvin Guu. 2023. RARR: Researching and Revising What Language Models Say, Using Language Models. arXiv:2210.08726 [cs.CL] · arXiv
- Zhijiang Guo, Michael Schlichtkrull, and Andreas Vlachos. 2022. A Survey on Automated Fact-Checking. Transactions of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics 10 (02 2022), 178-206. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00454 arXiv:https://direct.mit.edu/tacl/article- pdf/doi/10.1162/tacl_a_00454/1987018/tacl_a_00454.pdf · DOI
- Vladimir Karpukhin, Barlas Oğuz, Sewon Min, Patrick Lewis, Ledell Wu, Sergey Edunov, Danqi Chen, and Wen-tau Yih. 2020. Dense passage retrieval for open- domain question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.04906 (2020). · arXiv
- Jimmy Lin, Xueguang Ma, Sheng-Chieh Lin, Jheng-Hong Yang, Ronak Pradeep, and Rodrigo Frassetto Nogueira. 2021. Pyserini: An Easy-to-Use Python Toolkit to Support Replicable IR Research with Sparse and Dense Representations. CoRR abs/2102.10073 (2021). arXiv:2102.10073 https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.10073 · arXiv
- Yang Liu. 2019. Fine-tune BERT for extractive summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.10318 (2019). · arXiv
- Joshua Maynez, Shashi Narayan, Bernd Bohnet, and Ryan T. McDonald. 2020. On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization. CoRR abs/2005.00661 (2020). arXiv:2005.00661 https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.00661 · arXiv
- Derek Miller. 2019. Leveraging BERT for extractive text summarization on lectures. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.04165 (2019). · arXiv
- Tri Nguyen, Mir Rosenberg, Xia Song, Jianfeng Gao, Saurabh Tiwary, Rangan Majumder, and Li Deng. 2016. MS MARCO: A human generated machine reading comprehension dataset. choice 2640 (2016), 660.
- Ronak Pradeep, Rodrigo Nogueira, and Jimmy Lin. 2021. The Expando-Mono-Duo Design Pattern for Text Ranking with Pretrained Sequence-to-Sequence Models. arXiv:2101.05667 [cs.IR] · arXiv
- Vikas Raunak, Arul Menezes, and Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt. 2021. The Curious Case of Hallucinations in Neural Machine Translation. CoRR abs/2104.06683 (2021). arXiv:2104.06683 https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.06683 · arXiv
- Stephen Robertson, S. Walker, S. Jones, M. M. Hancock-Beaulieu, and M. Gatford. 1995. Okapi at TREC-3. In Overview of the Third Text REtrieval Conference (TREC- 3) (overview of the third text retrieval conference (trec-3) ed.). Gaithersburg, MD: NIST, 109-126. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/okapi-at- trec-3/
- Mark Sanderson and W. Bruce Croft. 2012. The History of Information Retrieval Research. Proc. IEEE 100, Special Centennial Issue (2012), 1444-1451. https: //doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2012.2189916 · DOI
- Nandan Thakur, Nils Reimers, Andreas Rücklé, Abhishek Srivastava, and Iryna Gurevych. 2021. BEIR: A Heterogeneous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Models. In Thirty-fifth Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track (Round 2). https://openreview. net/forum?id=wCu6T5xFjeJ
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention Is All You Need. CoRR abs/1706.03762 (2017). arXiv:1706.03762 http://arxiv.org/abs/1706. 03762 · arXiv
- Zhiguo Wang, Patrick Ng, Xiaofei Ma, Ramesh Nallapati, and Bing Xiang. 2019. Multi-passage bert: A globally normalized bert model for open-domain question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.08167 (2019). · arXiv
- Jules White, Quchen Fu, Sam Hays, Michael Sandborn, Carlos Olea, Henry Gilbert, Ashraf Elnashar, Jesse Spencer-Smith, and Douglas C. Schmidt. 2023. A Prompt Pattern Catalog to Enhance Prompt Engineering with ChatGPT. arXiv:2302.11382 [cs.SE] · arXiv
- Lee Xiong, Chenyan Xiong, Ye Li, Kwok-Fung Tang, Jialin Liu, Paul Bennett, Junaid Ahmed, and Arnold Overwijk. 2020. Approximate Nearest Neighbor Negative Contrastive Learning for Dense Text Retrieval. arXiv:2007.00808 [cs.IR] · arXiv
- Wei Yang, Yuqing Xie, Aileen Lin, Xingyu Li, Luchen Tan, Kun Xiong, Ming Li, and Jimmy Lin. 2019. End-to-end open-domain question answering with bertserini. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.01718 (2019). · arXiv
- Shi Yu, Zhenghao Liu, Chenyan Xiong, Tao Feng, and Zhiyuan Liu. 2021. Few-shot conversational dense retrieval. In Proceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on research and development in information retrieval. 829-838.
- Jinhua Zhu, Yingce Xia, Lijun Wu, Di He, Tao Qin, Wengang Zhou, Houqiang Li, and Tie-Yan Liu. 2020. Incorporating bert into neural machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.06823 (2020). · arXiv
- Liron Zighelnic and Oren Kurland. 2008. Query-drift prevention for robust query expansion. In Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 825-826.
- Authors
- Huo, S., Arabzadeh, N., & Clarke, C. L. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Waterloo (CA)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2306.13781
- OpenAlex
- W4382319416
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- hallucination detection, large language models, answer verification, retrieval-augmented generation, open-domain question answering, MS MARCO, BM25 retrieval
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
