aiqbench analysis
This research identifies relational linearity in embeddings as a strong predictor of hallucinations, showing that linear models can easily fabricate plausible answers for non-existent entities while nonlinear relations help avoid this failure mode. The study introduces SyntHal, a synthetic benchmark for unknown entities, which reveals high correlations between linearity and hallucination rates across instruction-tuned models. For practitioners, this suggests that architectural choices regarding embedding linearity could significantly impact a model's ability to recognize and refuse answers to queries about unknown subjects.
Relational Linearity is a Predictor of Hallucinations
arXiv:2601.11429v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Hallucination is a central failure mode of language models (LMs). We focus on hallucinations in response to questions like: "Which instrument did Glenn Gould play?", but we ask these questions for synthetic entities designed to be unknown to the model. We find that LMs like Gemma-7B-IT frequently hallucinate, i.e., they have difficulty recognizing that the hallucinated fact is not part of their knowledge. Based on the idea of linear relational embeddings, we put forward the following hypothesis. (i) Due to the abstract scheme that is used to represent them, LMs can easily produce plausible objects for non-existing subjects of linear relations, which can lead to hallucinations. (ii) For a nonlinear relation, this mechanism for producing an object is not available and so a hallucination is easier to avoid. To test this hypothesis, we create SyntHal, a synthetic unknown-entity benchmark for 15 relations. We find that across four instruction-tuned models, relational linearity is a strong predictor of models hallucinating an object for an unknown subject vs refusing to give an answer, with correlations $r \in [.58, .84]$.
Abstract:Hallucination is a central failure mode of language models (LMs). We focus on hallucinations in response to questions like: "Which instrument did Glenn Gould play?", but we ask these questions for synthetic entities designed to be unknown to the model. We find that LMs like Gemma-7B-IT frequently hallucinate, i.e., they have difficulty recognizing that the hallucinated fact is not part of their knowledge. Based on the idea of linear relational embeddings, we put forward the following hypothesis. (i) Due to the abstract scheme that is used to represent them, LMs can easily produce plausible objects for non-existing subjects of linear relations, which can lead to hallucinations. (ii) For a nonlinear relation, this mechanism for producing an object is not available and so a hallucination is easier to avoid. To test this hypothesis, we create SyntHal, a synthetic unknown-entity benchmark for 15 relations. We find that across four instruction-tuned models, relational linearity is a strong predictor of models hallucinating an object for an unknown subject vs refusing to give an answer, with correlations $r \in [.58, .84]$.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2601.11429 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2601.11429v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.11429 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 272 words
Related coverage
Relational Linearity is a Predictor of Hallucinations
arXiv · Sep 5, 2026
Forecasting Bacterial Antimicrobial Resistance Trends Using Machine Learning on WHO GLASS Surveillance Data: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation Approach for Policy Decision Support
arXiv · Sep 30, 2026

The Entangled Dimensions of Decision Theory
LessWrong · Jul 30, 2026

PIRAMID: Progress and Plans
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026