Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

HalluTruthQA introduces a rigorous benchmark for evaluating large language models in Arabic, specifically targeting the detection, localization, and explanation of factual errors rather than just response-level accuracy. By covering knowledge-intensive domains like Islamic history and science with character-level error spans, this dataset addresses critical gaps where existing evaluations fail to pinpoint specific hallucinations or provide verifiable corrections. The findings underscore that current open-source models struggle significantly with fine-grained verification tasks in Arabic, suggesting a clear need for improved training data focused on factual grounding across diverse cultural contexts.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

HalluTruthQA: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Hallucination Detection, Localization, and Explanation in Arabic Question Answering

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2607.20219v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent Arabic answers, yet factual errors remain difficult to detect, localize, explain, and verify. Existing hallucination benchmarks often provide response-level labels, with limited support for identifying the exact erroneous content, explaining why it is incorrect, or selecting the correct factual answer. We introduce \textsc{HalluTruthQA}, a fine-grained benchmark for hallucination evaluation in Arabic question answering. The benchmark contains 2,400 expert-curated examples across four knowledge-intensive domains: Islamic knowledge, history, science, and geography. Each example pairs an Arabic question and a model-generated answer with a verified reference answer, a binary hallucination label, six candidate answers for factual verification, and, for hallucinated answers, character-level erroneous spans, human-written explanations, and macro and micro hallucination types. We evaluate four open-source LLMs, \textsc{Allam}, \textsc{Falcon-H1}, \textsc{Qwen32}, and \textsc{Silma}, in a zero-shot setting across hallucination detection, span-level localization, factual verification, and explanation evaluation. Results show that these tasks capture different abilities: no single model achieves the strongest performance across all tasks, with best scores of 0.880 Macro-F1 for detection, 0.516 F1-Sp for localization, 0.852 LO-Score for factual verification, and 0.644 final score for explanation evaluation. Our taxonomy shows that hallucination evaluation should move beyond detection toward localizing, verifying, and explaining factual errors. The code, dataset, prompts, and evaluation scripts are available at https://gitlab.com/nlpresearcher/HalluTruthQA.

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent Arabic answers, yet factual errors remain difficult to detect, localize, explain, and verify. Existing hallucination benchmarks often provide response-level labels, with limited support for identifying the exact erroneous content, explaining why it is incorrect, or selecting the correct factual answer. We introduce \textsc{HalluTruthQA}, a fine-grained benchmark for hallucination evaluation in Arabic question answering. The benchmark contains 2,400 expert-curated examples across four knowledge-intensive domains: Islamic knowledge, history, science, and geography. Each example pairs an Arabic question and a model-generated answer with a verified reference answer, a binary hallucination label, six candidate answers for factual verification, and, for hallucinated answers, character-level erroneous spans, human-written explanations, and macro and micro hallucination types. We evaluate four open-source LLMs, \textsc{Allam}, \textsc{Falcon-H1}, \textsc{Qwen32}, and \textsc{Silma}, in a zero-shot setting across hallucination detection, span-level localization, factual verification, and explanation evaluation. Results show that these tasks capture different abilities: no single model achieves the strongest performance across all tasks, with best scores of 0.880 Macro-F1 for detection, 0.516 F1-Sp for localization, 0.852 LO-Score for factual verification, and 0.644 final score for explanation evaluation. Our taxonomy shows that hallucination evaluation should move beyond detection toward localizing, verifying, and explaining factual errors. The code, dataset, prompts, and evaluation scripts are available at this https URL.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2607.20219 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2607.20219v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.20219 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 231 words

Related coverage