analiza aiqbench
CiteCheck addresses the critical issue of citation hallucinations in LLM-generated scientific reports by combining external retrieval with structured verification. The framework successfully distinguishes between exact matches, minor metadata drifts, and major fabrications on a new physics benchmark, outperforming standard generative models. This work highlights the necessity of hybrid approaches that integrate scholarly databases to ensure factual integrity in AI-assisted research writing.
CiteCheck: Retrieval-Grounded Detection of LLM Citation Hallucinations in Scientific Text
arXiv:2605.27700v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate scientific reports, but they can produce references that appear plausible while containing corrupted metadata or pointing to papers that do not exist. We introduce CiteCheck, a hybrid framework for citation hallucination detection that verifies whether a citation corresponds to a real scholarly work and whether its metadata is faithful to that work. CiteCheck retrieves candidate publications from external scholarly sources, compares the citation against the retrieved candidate using a structured LLM verifier, and maps verifier scores into three labels: Exact, Minor, and Major. We also construct a 982-citation physics benchmark with controlled corruptions that capture both subtle metadata drift and fully fabricated references. On the held-out test set, CiteCheck achieves 88.7 macro-F1 and 88.9% accuracy, outperforming GPT, Claude, and Gemini baselines, including web-search and few-shot variants. These results show that reliable citation verification benefits from combining scholarly retrieval, structured LLM-based comparison, and calibrated decision rules.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate scientific reports, but they can produce references that appear plausible while containing corrupted metadata or pointing to papers that do not exist. We introduce CiteCheck, a hybrid framework for citation hallucination detection that verifies whether a citation corresponds to a real scholarly work and whether its metadata is faithful to that work. CiteCheck retrieves candidate publications from external scholarly sources, compares the citation against the retrieved candidate using a structured LLM verifier, and maps verifier scores into three labels: Exact, Minor, and Major. We also construct a 982-citation physics benchmark with controlled corruptions that capture both subtle metadata drift and fully fabricated references. On the held-out test set, CiteCheck achieves 88.7 macro-F1 and 88.9% accuracy, outperforming GPT, Claude, and Gemini baselines, including web-search and few-shot variants. These results show that reliable citation verification benefits from combining scholarly retrieval, structured LLM-based comparison, and calibrated decision rules.
Digital Libraries (cs.DL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2605.27700 [cs.DL]
(or arXiv:2605.27700v2 [cs.DL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.27700 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 249 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 10 sept. 2026

Science One Framework: A verifiable autonomous research framework via Chain-of-Evidence
Google Research · 30 iul. 2026
Zero Hallucination, by Construction: Hallucination-Aware Layered Oversight for Trustworthy Enterprise AI
arXiv · 21 iul. 2026

Introducing Mistral OCR 4
Mistral AI · 23 iun. 2026