Paper detail

Robust Uncertainty Quantification for Factual Generation of Large Language Models

The rapid advancement of large language model(LLM) technology has facilitated its integration into various domains of professional and daily life. However, the persistent challenge of LLM hallucination has emerged as a critical limitation, significantly compromising the reliability and trustworthiness of AI-generated content. This challenge has garnered significant attention within the scientific community, prompting extensive research efforts in hallucination detection and mitigation strategies. Current methodological frameworks reveal a critical limitation: traditional uncertainty quantification approaches demonstrate effectiveness primarily within conventional question-answering paradigms, yet exhibit notable deficiencies when confronted with non-canonical or adversarial questioning strategies. This performance gap raises substantial concerns regarding the dependability of LLM responses in real-world applications requiring robust critical thinking capabilities. This study aims to fill this gap by proposing an uncertainty quantification scenario in the task of generating with multiple facts. We have meticulously constructed a set of trap questions contained with fake names. Based on this scenario, we innovatively propose a novel and robust uncertainty quantification method(RU). A series of experiments have been conducted to verify its effectiveness. The results show that the constructed set of trap questions performs excellently. Moreover, when compared with the baseline methods on four different models, our proposed method has demonstrated great performance, with an average increase of 0.1-0.2 in ROCAUC values compared to the best performing baseline method, providing new sights and methods for addressing the hallucination issue of LLMs.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.