SelfCite: Self-Supervised Alignment for Context Attribution in Large Language Models
Open accessAbstract
We introduce SelfCite, a novel self-supervised approach that aligns LLMs to generate high-quality, fine-grained, sentence-level citations for the statements in their generated responses. Instead of only relying on costly and labor-intensive annotations, SelfCite leverages a reward signal provided by the LLM itself through context ablation: If a citation is necessary, removing the cited text from the context should prevent the same response; if sufficient, retaining the cited text alone should preserve the same response. This reward can guide the inference-time best-of-N sampling strategy to improve citation quality significantly, as well as be used in preference optimization to directly fine-tune the models for generating better citations. The effectiveness of SelfCite is demonstrated by increasing citation F1 up to 5.3 points on the LongBench-Cite benchmark across five long-form question answering tasks. The source code is available at https://github.com/facebookresearch/SelfCite
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Prior work optimizes citation accuracy via better retrieval or training but ignores when and how often systems should abstain rather than hallucinate.
“Prior work optimizes citation accuracy via better retrieval [8, 9] or training [10, 11], but ignores when and how often systems should abstain rather than hallucinate .”
From Abstention vs. Hallucination: Benchmarking LLM Source Attribution for Scientific Citations (2024) · cites this paper as [10]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey of Context Engineering for Large Language Models
Mei, L., Yao, J., Ge, Y., Wang, Y., Bi, B., Cai, Y., Liu, J., Li, M., Li, Z.-Z., Zhang, D., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.13334 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Abstention vs. Hallucination: Benchmarking LLM Source Attribution for Scientific Citations
Tilwani, D., Saxena, Y., Mohammadi, S., Padia, A., Raff, E., Sheth, A., Parthasarathy, S., & Gaur, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.02228 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“Source-aware training methods [11, 18] teach models to associate generated content with source identifiers, and self-supervised alignment techniques [10] refine citation placement through contrastive learning.”
Search Arena: Analyzing Search-Augmented LLMs
Miroyan, M., Wu, T.-H., King, L., Li, T., Pan, J., Hu, X., Chiang, W.-L., Angelopoulos, A. N., Darrell, T., Norouzi, N., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.05334 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“In Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) settings, retrieved text is appended to the input prompt [32, 20, 24, 11]; later work explored search-augmented systems operating in the open web [24, 49, 67].”
- Authors
- Chuang, Y.-S., Cohen-Wang, B., Shen, S. Z., Wu, Z., Xu, H., Lin, X. V., Glass, J., Li, S.-W., & Yih, W.-T.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2502.09604
- OpenAlex
- W4407590567
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- 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 › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Keywords
- citation generation, large language models, reward modeling, best-of-N sampling, preference optimization, long-form question answering
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
