Recent large language models (LLMs) achieve impressive performance in source-conditioned text generation but often fail to correctly provide fine-grained attributions for their outputs, undermining verifiability and trust. Moreover, existing attribution methods do not explain how and why models leverage the provided source documents to generate their final responses, limiting interpretability. To overcome these challenges, we introduce a modular generation framework, GenerationPrograms, inspired by recent advancements in executable "code agent" architectures. Unlike conventional generation methods that simultaneously generate outputs and attributions or rely on post-hoc attribution, GenerationPrograms decomposes the process into two distinct stages: first, creating an executable program plan composed of modular text operations (such as paraphrasing, compression, and fusion) explicitly tailored to the query, and second, executing these operations following the program's specified instructions to produce the final response. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that GenerationPrograms significantly improves attribution quality at both the document level and sentence level across two long-form question-answering tasks and a multi-document summarization task. We further demonstrate that GenerationPrograms can effectively function as a post-hoc attribution method, outperforming traditional techniques in recovering accurate attributions. In addition, the interpretable programs generated by GenerationPrograms enable localized refinement through modular-level improvements that further enhance overall attribution quality.
Personalization is essential for question answering systems that are user-centric. Despite its importance, personalization in answer generation has been relatively underexplored. This is mainly due to lack of resources for training and evaluating personalized question answering systems. We address this gap by introducing LaMP-QA -- a benchmark designed for evaluating personalized long-form answer generation. The benchmark covers questions from three major categories: (1) Arts & Entertainment, (2) Lifestyle & Personal Development, and (3) Society & Culture, encompassing over 45 subcategories in total. To assess the quality and potential impact of the LaMP-QA benchmark for personalized question answering, we conduct comprehensive human and automatic evaluations, to compare multiple evaluation strategies for evaluating generated personalized responses and measure their alignment with human preferences. Furthermore, we benchmark a number of non-personalized and personalized approaches based on open-source and proprietary large language models (LLMs). Our results show that incorporating the personalized context provided leads to performance improvements of up to 39%. The benchmark is publicly released to support future research in this area.
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit extensive medical knowledge but are prone to hallucinations and inaccurate citations, which pose a challenge to their clinical adoption and regulatory compliance. Current methods, such as Retrieval Augmented Generation, partially address these issues by grounding answers in source documents, but hallucinations and low fact-level explainability persist. In this work, we introduce a novel atomic fact-checking framework designed to enhance the reliability and explainability of LLMs used in medical long-form question answering. This method decomposes LLM-generated responses into discrete, verifiable units called atomic facts, each of which is independently verified against an authoritative knowledge base of medical guidelines. This approach enables targeted correction of errors and direct tracing to source literature, thereby improving the factual accuracy and explainability of medical Q&A. Extensive evaluation using multi-reader assessments by medical experts and an automated open Q&A benchmark demonstrated significant improvements in factual accuracy and explainability. Our framework achieved up to a 40% overall answer improvement and a 50% hallucination detection rate. The ability to trace each atomic fact back to the most relevant chunks from the database provides a granular, transparent explanation of the generated responses, addressing a major gap in current medical AI applications. This work represents a crucial step towards more trustworthy and reliable clinical applications of LLMs, addressing key prerequisites for clinical application and fostering greater confidence in AI-assisted healthcare.
Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently produce factoid hallucinations - plausible yet incorrect answers. A common mitigation strategy is model alignment, which improves factual accuracy by training on curated factual and non-factual pairs. However, this approach often relies on a stronger model (e.g., GPT-4) or an external knowledge base to assess factual correctness, which may not always be accessible. To address this, we propose Atomic Consistency Preference Optimization (ACPO), a self-supervised preference-tuning method that enhances factual accuracy without external supervision. ACPO leverages atomic consistency signals, i.e., the agreement of individual facts across multiple stochastic responses, to identify high- and low-quality data pairs for model alignment. By eliminating the need for costly GPT calls, ACPO provides a scalable and efficient approach to improving factoid question-answering. Despite being self-supervised, empirical results demonstrate that ACPO outperforms FactAlign, a strong supervised alignment baseline, by 1.95 points on the LongFact and BioGen datasets, highlighting its effectiveness in enhancing factual reliability without relying on external models or knowledge bases.
\Ac{LFQA} aims to generate lengthy answers to complex questions. This scenario presents great flexibility as well as significant challenges for evaluation. Most evaluations rely on deterministic metrics that depend on string or n-gram matching, while the reliability of large language model-based evaluations for long-form answers remains relatively unexplored. We address this gap by conducting an in-depth study of long-form answer evaluation with the following research questions: (i) To what extent do existing automatic evaluation metrics serve as a substitute for human evaluations? (ii) What are the limitations of existing evaluation metrics compared to human evaluations? (iii) How can the effectiveness and robustness of existing evaluation methods be improved? We collect 5,236 factoid and non-factoid long-form answers generated by different large language models and conduct a human evaluation on 2,079 of them, focusing on correctness and informativeness. Subsequently, we investigated the performance of automatic evaluation metrics by evaluating these answers, analyzing the consistency between these metrics and human evaluations. We find that the style, length of the answers, and the category of questions can bias the automatic evaluation metrics. However, fine-grained evaluation helps mitigate this issue on some metrics. Our findings have important implications for the use of large language models for evaluating long-form question answering. All code and datasets are available at https://github.com/bugtig6351/lfqa_evaluation.
Multi-agent collaboration among models has shown promise in reasoning tasks but is underexplored in long-form generation tasks like summarization and question-answering. We extend multi-agent multi-model reasoning to generation, specifically to improving faithfulness through refinement, i.e., revising model-generated outputs to remove factual inconsistencies. We investigate how iterative collaboration among multiple instances and types of large language models (LLMs) enhances subtasks in the refinement process, such as error detection, critiquing unfaithful sentences, and making corrections based on critiques. We design intrinsic evaluations for each subtask, with our findings indicating that both multi-agent (multiple instances) and multi-model (diverse LLM types) approaches benefit error detection and critiquing. Additionally, reframing critiquing and refinement as reranking rather than generation tasks improves multi-agent performance. We consolidate these insights into a final "recipe" called Multi-Agent Multi-Model Refinement (MAMM-Refine), where multi-agent and multi-model collaboration significantly boosts performance on three summarization datasets as well as on long-form question answering, demonstrating the effectiveness and generalizability of our recipe.
Improving context faithfulness in large language models is essential for developing trustworthy retrieval augmented generation systems and mitigating hallucinations, especially in long-form question answering (LFQA) tasks or scenarios involving knowledge conflicts. Existing methods either intervene LLMs only at inference without addressing their inherent limitations or overlook the potential for self-improvement. In this paper, we introduce GenDiE (Generate, Discriminate, Evolve), a novel self-evolving framework that enhances context faithfulness through fine-grained sentence-level optimization. GenDiE combines both generative and discriminative training, equipping LLMs with self-generation and self-scoring capabilities to facilitate iterative self-evolution. This supports both data construction for model alignment and score-guided search during inference. Furthermore, by treating each sentence in a response as an independent optimization unit, GenDiE effectively addresses the limitations of previous approaches that optimize at the holistic answer level, which may miss unfaithful details. Experiments on ASQA (in-domain LFQA) and ConFiQA (out-of-domain counterfactual QA) datasets demonstrate that GenDiE surpasses various baselines in both faithfulness and correctness, and exhibits robust performance for domain adaptation.
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as an approach to augment large language models (LLMs) by reducing their reliance on static knowledge and improving answer factuality. RAG retrieves relevant context snippets and generates an answer based on them. Despite its increasing industrial adoption, systematic exploration of RAG components is lacking, particularly regarding the ideal size of provided context, and the choice of base LLM and retrieval method. To help guide development of robust RAG systems, we evaluate various context sizes, BM25 and semantic search as retrievers, and eight base LLMs. Moving away from the usual RAG evaluation with short answers, we explore the more challenging long-form question answering in two domains, where a good answer has to utilize the entire context. Our findings indicate that final QA performance improves steadily with up to 15 snippets but stagnates or declines beyond that. Finally, we show that different general-purpose LLMs excel in the biomedical domain than the encyclopedic one, and that open-domain evidence retrieval in large corpora is challenging.
In the age of misinformation, hallucination -- the tendency of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate non-factual or unfaithful responses -- represents the main risk for their global utility. Despite LLMs becoming increasingly multilingual, the vast majority of research on detecting and quantifying LLM hallucination are (a) English-centric and (b) focus on machine translation (MT) and summarization, tasks that are less common ``in the wild'' than open information seeking. In contrast, we aim to quantify the extent of LLM hallucination across languages in knowledge-intensive long-form question answering. To this end, we train a multilingual hallucination detection model and conduct a large-scale study across 30 languages and 6 open-source LLM families. We start from an English hallucination detection dataset and rely on MT to generate (noisy) training data in other languages. We also manually annotate gold data for five high-resource languages; we then demonstrate, for these languages, that the estimates of hallucination rates are similar between silver (LLM-generated) and gold test sets, validating the use of silver data for estimating hallucination rates for other languages. For the final rates estimation, we build a knowledge-intensive QA dataset for 30 languages with LLM-generated prompts and Wikipedia articles as references. We find that, while LLMs generate longer responses with more hallucinated tokens for higher-resource languages, there is no correlation between length-normalized hallucination rates of languages and their digital representation. Further, we find that smaller LLMs exhibit larger hallucination rates than larger models.
We introduce SelfCite, a novel self-supervised approach that aligns LLMs to generate high-quality, fine-grained, sentence-level citations for the statements in their generated responses. Instead of only relying on costly and labor-intensive annotations, SelfCite leverages a reward signal provided by the LLM itself through context ablation: If a citation is necessary, removing the cited text from the context should prevent the same response; if sufficient, retaining the cited text alone should preserve the same response. This reward can guide the inference-time best-of-N sampling strategy to improve citation quality significantly, as well as be used in preference optimization to directly fine-tune the models for generating better citations. The effectiveness of SelfCite is demonstrated by increasing citation F1 up to 5.3 points on the LongBench-Cite benchmark across five long-form question answering tasks.
Ensuring contextual faithfulness in retrieval-augmented large language models (LLMs) is crucial for building trustworthy information-seeking systems, particularly in long-form question-answering (LFQA) scenarios. In this work, we identify a salient correlation between LFQA faithfulness and retrieval heads, a set of attention heads responsible for retrieving contextual information. Leveraging this insight, we propose RHIO, a framework designed to teach LLMs to explicitly discriminate between faithful and unfaithful generations. RHIO first augments unfaithful samples that simulate realistic model-intrinsic errors by selectively masking retrieval heads. Then, these samples are incorporated into joint training, enabling the model to distinguish unfaithful outputs from faithful ones conditioned on control tokens. Furthermore, these control tokens are leveraged to self-induce contrastive outputs, amplifying their difference through contrastive decoding. Additionally, to facilitate the evaluation of contextual faithfulness, we also introduce GroundBench, a comprehensive benchmark compiled from five existing LFQA datasets. Extensive experimental results on GroundBench demonstrate that RHIO significantly improves faithfulness, even outperforming GPT-4o.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation equips large language models with the capability to retrieve external knowledge, thereby mitigating hallucinations by incorporating information beyond the model's intrinsic abilities. However, most prior works have focused on invoking retrieval deterministically, which makes it unsuitable for tasks such as long-form question answering. Instead, dynamically performing retrieval by invoking it only when the underlying LLM lacks the required knowledge can be more efficient. In this context, we delve deeper into the question, "To Retrieve or Not to Retrieve?" by exploring multiple uncertainty detection methods. We evaluate these methods for the task of long-form question answering, employing dynamic retrieval, and present our comparisons. Our findings suggest that uncertainty detection metrics, such as Degree Matrix Jaccard and Eccentricity, can reduce the number of retrieval calls by almost half, with only a slight reduction in question-answering accuracy.
The advancement of LLMs has significantly boosted the performance of complex long-form question answering tasks. However, one prominent issue of LLMs is the generated "hallucination" responses that are not factual. Consequently, attribution for each claim in responses becomes a common solution to improve the factuality and verifiability. Existing researches mainly focus on how to provide accurate citations for the response, which largely overlook the importance of identifying the claims or statements for each response. To bridge this gap, we introduce a new claim decomposition benchmark, which requires building system that can identify atomic and checkworthy claims for LLM responses. Specifically, we present the Chinese Atomic Claim Decomposition Dataset (CACDD), which builds on the WebCPM dataset with additional expert annotations to ensure high data quality. The CACDD encompasses a collection of 500 human-annotated question-answer pairs, including a total of 4956 atomic claims. We further propose a new pipeline for human annotation and describe the challenges of this task. In addition, we provide experiment results on zero-shot, few-shot and fine-tuned LLMs as baselines. The results show that the claim decomposition is highly challenging and requires further explorations. All code and data are publicly available at \url{https://github.com/FBzzh/CACDD}.
Long-form question answering (LFQA) aims at generating in-depth answers to end-user questions, providing relevant information beyond the direct answer. However, existing retrievers are typically optimized towards information that directly targets the question, missing out on such contextual information. Furthermore, there is a lack of training data for relevant context. To this end, we propose and compare different weak supervision techniques to optimize retrieval for contextual information. Experiments demonstrate improvements on the end-to-end QA performance on ASQA, a dataset for long-form question answering. Importantly, as more contextual information is retrieved, we improve the relevant page recall for LFQA by 14.7% and the groundedness of generated long-form answers by 12.5%. Finally, we show that long-form answers often anticipate likely follow-up questions, via experiments on a conversational QA dataset.
Long-Form Question Answering (LFQA) refers to generating in-depth, paragraph-level responses to open-ended questions. Although lots of LFQA methods are developed, evaluating LFQA effectively and efficiently remains challenging due to its high complexity and cost. Therefore, there is no standard benchmark for LFQA evaluation till now. To address this gap, we make the first attempt by proposing a well-constructed, reference-based benchmark named Chinese exAmination for LFQA Evaluation (CALF), aiming to rigorously assess the performance of automatic evaluation metrics for LFQA. The CALF benchmark is derived from Chinese examination questions that have been translated into English. It includes up to 1476 examples consisting of knowledge-intensive and nuanced responses. Our evaluation comprises three different settings to ana lyze the behavior of automatic metrics comprehensively. We conducted extensive experiments on 7 traditional evaluation metrics, 3 prompt-based metrics, and 3 trained evaluation metrics, and tested on agent systems for the LFQA evaluation. The results reveal that none of the current automatic evaluation metrics shows comparable performances with humans, indicating that they cannot capture dense information contained in long-form responses well. In addition, we provide a detailed analysis of the reasons why automatic evaluation metrics fail when evaluating LFQA, offering valuable insights to advance LFQA evaluation systems. Dataset and associated codes can be accessed at our GitHub repository.
LLMs have revolutionized the landscape of information retrieval and knowledge dissemination. However, their application in specialized areas is often hindered by factual inaccuracies and hallucinations, especially in long-tail knowledge distributions. We explore the potential of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) models for long-form question answering (LFQA) in a specialized knowledge domain. We present VedantaNY-10M, a dataset curated from extensive public discourses on the ancient Indian philosophy of Advaita Vedanta. We develop and benchmark a RAG model against a standard, non-RAG LLM, focusing on transcription, retrieval, and generation performance. Human evaluations by computational linguists and domain experts show that the RAG model significantly outperforms the standard model in producing factual and comprehensive responses having fewer hallucinations. In addition, a keyword-based hybrid retriever that emphasizes unique low-frequency terms further improves results. Our study provides insights into effectively integrating modern large language models with ancient knowledge systems. Project page with dataset and code: https://sites.google.com/view/vedantany-10m
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant capabilities, particularly in the domain of question answering (QA). However, their effectiveness in QA is often undermined by the vagueness of user questions. To address this issue, we introduce single-round instance-level prompt optimization, referred to as question rewriter. By enhancing the intelligibility of human questions for black-box LLMs, our question rewriter improves the quality of generated answers. The rewriter is optimized using direct preference optimization based on feedback collected from automatic criteria for evaluating generated answers; therefore, its training does not require costly human annotations. The experiments across multiple black-box LLMs and long-form question answering (LFQA) datasets demonstrate the efficacy of our method. This paper provides a practical framework for training question rewriters and sets a precedent for future explorations in prompt optimization within LFQA tasks. Code is available at \url{https://github.com/3244we/Question-Rewriter}.
Long-form question answering (LFQA) aims to provide thorough and in-depth answers to complex questions, enhancing comprehension. However, such detailed responses are prone to hallucinations and factual inconsistencies, challenging their faithful evaluation. This work introduces HaluQuestQA, the first hallucination dataset with localized error annotations for human-written and model-generated LFQA answers. HaluQuestQA comprises 698 QA pairs with 1.8k span-level error annotations for five different error types by expert annotators, along with preference judgments. Using our collected data, we thoroughly analyze the shortcomings of long-form answers and find that they lack comprehensiveness and provide unhelpful references. We train an automatic feedback model on this dataset that predicts error spans with incomplete information and provides associated explanations. Finally, we propose a prompt-based approach, Error-informed refinement, that uses signals from the learned feedback model to refine generated answers, which we show reduces errors and improves answer quality across multiple models. Furthermore, humans find answers generated by our approach comprehensive and highly prefer them (84%) over the baseline answers.
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit hallucinations in long-form question-answering tasks across various domains and wide applications. Current hallucination detection and mitigation datasets are limited in domains and sizes, which struggle to scale due to prohibitive labor costs and insufficient reliability of existing hallucination annotators. To facilitate the scalable oversight of LLM hallucinations, this paper introduces an iterative self-training framework that simultaneously and progressively scales up the hallucination annotation dataset and improves the accuracy of the hallucination annotator. Based on the Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm, in each iteration, the framework first applies a hallucination annotation pipeline to annotate a scaled dataset and then trains a more accurate hallucination annotator on the dataset. This new hallucination annotator is adopted in the hallucination annotation pipeline used for the next iteration. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that the finally obtained hallucination annotator with only 7B parameters surpasses the performance of GPT-4 and obtains new state-of-the-art hallucination detection results on HaluEval and HalluQA by zero-shot inference. Such an annotator can not only evaluate the hallucination levels of various LLMs on the large-scale dataset but also help to mitigate the hallucination of LLMs generations, with the Natural Language Inference (NLI) metric increasing from 25% to 37% on HaluEval.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been widely adopted to enhance Large Language Models (LLMs) in knowledge-intensive tasks. Recently, Attributed Text Generation (ATG) has attracted growing attention, which provides citations to support the model's responses in RAG, so as to enhance the credibility of LLM-generated content and facilitate verification. Prior methods mainly adopt coarse-grained attributions, linking to passage-level references or providing paragraph-level citations. However, these methods still fall short in verifiability and require certain time costs for fact checking. This paper proposes a fine-grained ATG method called ReClaim(Refer & Claim), which alternates the generation of references and answers step by step. Unlike traditional coarse-grained attribution, ReClaim allows the model to add sentence-level fine-grained citations to each answer sentence in long-form question-answering tasks. Our experiments encompass various training and inference methods and multiple LLMs, verifying the effectiveness of our approach.