Sanity Checks for Long-Form Hallucination Detection
Hallucination detection methods for large language models increasingly operate on chain-of-thought reasoning traces, yet it remains unclear whether they evaluate the reasoning itself or merely exploit surface correlates of the final answer. We introduce a controlled-invariance methodology that exposes this distinction through two oracle tests: \textsc{Force}, which replaces each response's final answer with the ground truth while preserving the reasoning trace, and \textsc{Remove}, which strips answer-announcement steps while leaving the trajectory intact. This reveals if their predictive power derives from answer-level artifacts rather than from the structure or validity of intermediate reasoning. We further show that once these artifacts are controlled for, effective detection does not necessarily require complex learned representations: TRACT, a lightweight scorer built on lexical trajectory features (hedging trends, step-length dynamics, and cross-response vocabulary convergence), achieves strong robustness while remaining competitive with or outperforming existing baselines on unperturbed traces. These findings suggest that the current central challenge in reasoning-aware hallucination detection is not the absence of signal in the trace, but the failure to isolate it from endpoint cues.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Sanity Checks for Saliency Methods Explaining Object Detectors
Saliency methods are frequently used to explain Deep Neural Network-based models. Adebayo et al.'s work on evaluating saliency methods for classification models illustrate certain explanation methods fail the model and d…
Objectobject-detectionObject DetectionShortcomings of Top-Down Randomization-Based Sanity Checks for Evaluations of Deep Neural Network Explanations
While the evaluation of explanations is an important step towards trustworthy models, it needs to be done carefully, and the employed metrics need to be well-understood. Specifically model randomization testing is often …
Revisiting Sanity Checks for Saliency Maps
Saliency methods are a popular approach for model debugging and explainability. However, in the absence of ground-truth data for what the correct maps should be, evaluating and comparing different approaches remains a lo…
A Simple Technique to Enable Saliency Methods to Pass the Sanity Checks
{\em Saliency methods} attempt to explain a deep net's decision by assigning a {\em score} to each feature/pixel in the input, often doing this credit-assignment via the gradient of the output with respect to input. Re…
Sanity Checks for Agentic Data Science
Agentic data science (ADS) pipelines have grown rapidly in both capability and adoption, with systems such as OpenAI Codex now able to directly analyze datasets and produce answers to statistical questions. However, thes…