arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
​通知:联邦节假日调休:哥伦布日 / 原住民日(Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day),今日(13日)无更新。
arXiv 2411.05980cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG

FactLens:细粒度事实验证基准测试

FactLens: Benchmarking Fine-Grained Fact Verification

Megagon Labs(梅加贡实验室);Adobe Inc.(Adobe公司)

Kushan Mitra, Dan Zhang, Sajjadur Rahman, Estevam Hruschka

AI总结:

本文提出细粒度事实验证基准FactLens,通过将复杂声明拆分为子声明进行单独验证,以解决LLM幻觉问题并提升验证精度,实验表明其自动化评估器与人类判断高度一致。

摘要:

大型语言模型(LLMs)在语言生成与理解方面展现了令人印象深刻的能力,但其产生幻觉和输出事实错误信息的倾向仍是一个关键局限。为了验证LLM生成的内容及其他来源的声明,传统验证方法通常依赖整体模型为复杂声明分配单一事实性标签,这可能掩盖细微的错误。本文中,我们提倡向细粒度验证转变,即将复杂声明拆分为更小的子声明进行单独验证,从而实现更精确的不准确之处识别、提高透明度并减少证据检索中的歧义。然而,生成子声明带来了挑战,如维持上下文及确保与原始声明的语义等价性。我们引入了FactLens,这是一个用于评估细粒度事实验证的基准,包含子声明质量的指标和自动化评估器。该基准数据经过人工筛选以确保高质量的基准真值。我们的结果显示,自动化FactLens评估器与人类判断之间存在一致性,并探讨了子声明特征对整体验证性能的影响。

英文摘要:

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capability in language generation and understanding, but their tendency to hallucinate and produce factually incorrect information remains a key limitation. To verify LLM-generated contents and claims from other sources, traditional verification approaches often rely on holistic models that assign a single factuality label to complex claims, potentially obscuring nuanced errors. In this paper, we advocate for a shift towards fine-grained verification, where complex claims are broken down into smaller sub-claims for individual verification, allowing for more precise identification of inaccuracies, improved transparency, and reduced ambiguity in evidence retrieval. However, generating sub-claims poses challenges, such as maintaining context and ensuring semantic equivalence with respect to the original claim. We introduce FactLens, a benchmark for evaluating fine-grained fact verification, with metrics and automated evaluators of sub-claim quality. The benchmark data is manually curated to ensure high-quality ground truth. Our results show alignment between automated FactLens evaluators and human judgments, and we discuss the impact of sub-claim characteristics on the overall verification performance.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑