GSAR: Typed Grounding for Hallucination Detection and Recovery in Multi-Agent LLMs
Autonomous multi-agent LLM systems are increasingly deployed to investigate operational incidents and produce structured diagnostic reports. Their trustworthiness hinges on whether each claim is grounded in observed evidence rather than model-internal inference. Existing groundedness evaluators (binary classifiers, LLM-as-judge scalars, self-correction loops) treat supporting evidence as interchangeable and emit a single signal that offers no principled control over downstream action. We present GSAR, a grounding-evaluation and replanning framework that (i) partitions claims into a four-way typology (grounded, ungrounded, contradicted, complementary), giving first-class standing to non-redundant alternative perspectives; (ii) assigns evidence-type-specific weights reflecting epistemic strength; (iii) computes an asymmetric contradiction-penalised weighted groundedness score; and (iv) couples that score to a three-tier decision function (proceed, regenerate, replan) driving a bounded-iteration outer loop under an explicit compute budget. We formalise the algorithm, prove six structural properties, and evaluate five design claims on FEVER with gold Wikipedia evidence under four independently-trained LLM judges (gpt-5.4, claude-sonnet-4-6, claude-opus-4-7, gemini-2.5-pro). Every ablation reproduces in the same direction on every judge: bootstrap 95% CIs on the rho=0 effect exclude 0 on all four; the no-complementary ablation under Opus 4.7 has CI [-96,-68] of 200; at n=1000 three independent judges converge to DeltaS(rho=0)=+0.058. A head-to-head against Vectara HHEM-2.1-Open is included. To our knowledge, GSAR is the first published groundedness framework coupling evidence-typed scoring with tiered recovery under an explicit compute budget.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Detecting Clinical Hallucinations in LVLMs via Counterfactual Visual Grounding Uncertainty
Large vision-language models (LVLMs) are increasingly used for clinical image understanding, yet they remain vulnerable to \emph{hallucinations}--producing textual findings or attributes not supported by the image. We pr…
Visual GroundingSeeing is Believing: Rich-Context Hallucination Detection for MLLMs via Backward Visual Grounding
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have unlocked powerful cross-modal capabilities, but still significantly suffer from hallucinations. As such, accurate detection of hallucinations in MLLMs is imperative for ensur…
Visual GroundingNeuro-Symbolic Financial Reasoning via Deterministic Fact Ledgers and Adversarial Low-Latency Hallucination Detector
Standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) architectures fail in high-stakes financial domains due to two fundamental limitations: the inherent arithmetic incompetence of Large Language Models (LLMs) and the distribut…
Pre-Training Multimodal Hallucination Detectors with Corrupted Grounding Data
Multimodal language models can exhibit hallucinations in their outputs, which limits their reliability. The ability to automatically detect these errors is important for mitigating them, but has been less explored and ex…
HallucinationPhrase GroundingLegalHalluLens: Typed Hallucination Auditing and Calibrated Multi-Agent Debate for Trustworthy Legal AI
AI systems deployed in legal workflows hallucinate at rates that aggregate metrics report at ~52%, but this average conceals where errors concentrate and in which direction they run, leaving compliance officers without a…