LLM Hallucination

From GM-RKB
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A LLM Hallucination is a cognitive bias that occurs when a large language model generates information that is not supported by its training data or real-world facts.



References

2024

2024

2024

  • (Hinton, 2024) => Geoffrey Hinton. (2024). "Will digital intelligence replace biological intelligence?." Romanes Lecture
    • QUOTE:
      • "hallucinations" show that LLMs don't really understand what they are saying?
      • They should be called "confabulations" and they are very characteristic of human memory.
      • Just like LLMs, our brains store knowledge in weights.

        They use these weights to reconstruct events.

        • If the events are recent the reconstructions are usually fairly accurate.
        • If the events are old, we typically get a lot of the details wrong (unless we rehearsed frequently).
      • We are often remarkably confident about details that we get wrong.

2024

  • (Wikipedia, 2024) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucination_(artificial_intelligence) Retrieved:2024-3-2.
    • In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), a hallucination or artificial hallucination (also called confabulation or delusion ) is a response generated by an AI which contains false or misleading information presented as fact. For example, a hallucinating chatbot might, when asked to generate a financial report for a company, falsely state that the company's revenue was $13.6 billion (or some other number apparently "plucked from thin air").[1] Such phenomena are termed "hallucinations", in loose analogy with the phenomenon of hallucination in human psychology. However, one key difference is that human hallucination is usually associated with false percepts, but an AI hallucination is associated with the category of unjustified responses or beliefs.[2] Some researchers believe the specific term "AI hallucination" unreasonably anthropomorphizes computers.[3] AI hallucination gained prominence during the AI boom, alongside the rollout of widely used chatbots based on large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT. Users complained that such chatbots often seemed to pointlessly embed plausible-sounding random falsehoods within their generated content. By 2023, analysts considered frequent hallucination to be a major problem in LLM technology, with some estimating chatbots hallucinate as much as 27% of the time and a study finding factual errors in 46% of generated responses.
  1. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named fast company 2022
  2. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named axiv
  3. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named ars making things up

2024

2023

2023

  • (Rawte et al., 2023) ⇒ Vipula Rawte, Amit Sheth, and Amitava Das. (2023). "A Survey of Hallucination in Large Foundation Models.” In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05922. [1]
    • QUOTE: “...hallucinations, detect them in LLM-generated text, and mitigate their impact to improve the overall quality and trustworthiness of LLM-… edit and correct hallucinations in language models. …”
    • ABSTRACT: Hallucination in a foundation model (FM) refers to the generation of content that strays from factual reality or includes fabricated information. This survey paper provides an extensive overview of recent efforts that aim to identify, elucidate, and tackle the problem of [LLM Hallucination|hallucination]], with a particular focus on ``Large Foundation Models (LFMs). The paper classifies various types of hallucination phenomena that are specific to LFMs and establishes evaluation criteria for assessing the extent of [LLM Hallucination|hallucination]]. It also examines existing strategies for mitigating hallucination in LFMs and discusses potential directions for future research in this area. Essentially, the paper offers a comprehensive examination of the challenges and solutions related to hallucination in LFMs.

2023

  • (Yao et al., 2023) ⇒ Jia-Yu Yao, Kun-Peng Ning, Zhen-Hui Liu Liu, Mu-Nan Ning, and Li Yuan. (2023). "LLM Lies: Hallucinations are Not Bugs, But Features as Adversarial Examples.” In: arXiv preprint arXiv …. [2]
    • QUOTE: “...to respond with [LLM Hallucination|hallucination]]s. This phenomenon forces us to revisit that [LLM Hallucination|hallucination]]s may be … Therefore, we formalize an automatic hallucination triggering method as the hallucination …”
    • ABSTRACT: Large Language Models (LLMs), including GPT-3.5, LLaMA, and PaLM, seem to be knowledgeable and able to adapt to many tasks. However, we still can not completely trust their answer, since LLMs suffer from hallucination -- fabricating non-existent facts to cheat users without perception. And the reasons for their existence and pervasiveness remain unclear. In this paper, we demonstrate that non-sense prompts composed of random tokens can also elicit the LLMs to respond with hallucinations. This phenomenon forces us to revisit that hallucination may be another view of adversarial examples, and it shares similar features with conventional adversarial examples as the basic feature of LLMs. Therefore, we formalize an automatic hallucination triggering method as the hallucination attack in an adversarial way. Finally, we explore basic feature of attacked adversarial prompts and propose a simple yet effective defense strategy. Our code is released on GitHub.

2023

  • (Ji et al., 2023) ⇒ Z Ji, YU Tiezheng, Y Xu, N Lee, E Ishii, .... (2023). "Towards Mitigating LLM Hallucination via Self Reflection.” In: The 2023 Conference …. [3]
    • QUOTE: “…notably the issue of 'hallucination', where models generate … This paper analyses the phenomenon of hallucination in … approach in hallucination reduction compared to baselines.…”