CLAIMPROBE is introduced, a claim-level audit that decomposes DR reports into claims and measures hallucination, misattribution, citation hygiene, and necessary-fact recall against retrieved evidence and proposes CLAIMWRITER, a hierarchical claim-based writer that extracts source facts, maps them to a query-derived outline, and drafts each section from a source-linked claim representation.
Abstract
Rubric-based evaluations of deep-research (DR) systems often obscure fine-grained factual failures in generated reports. We introduce CLAIMPROBE, a claim-level audit that decomposes DR reports into claims and measures hallucination, misattribution, citation hygiene, and necessary-fact recall against retrieved evidence. Using CLAIMPROBE, we find that strong DR pipelines can omit key evidence and misattribute claims even when their rubric scores remain stable. We then propose CLAIMWRITER, a hierarchical claim-based writer that extracts source facts, maps them to a query-derived outline, and drafts each section from a source-linked claim representation. Across three prior DR frameworks, replacing only the report writer with CLAIMWRITER reduces hallucination by 2.6 to 4.5 times and improves necessary-fact recall by 1.2 to 1.7 times, while largely preserving overall report quality. CLAIMWRITER also enables localized revision: when sources change, it propagates changed source facts into revised reports at the highest rate among update methods, while also being more cost-effective.
HallDetect, a lightweight, reference-free, and black-box framework for hallucination detection, is presented, a lightweight, reference-free, and black-box framework for hallucination detection that is evaluated not only on summarization but across a broader range of source-grounded generation settings.
Achir Oukelmoun, N. Semmar, Gaël de Chalendar· 0 citations
Video question answering systems built on vision-language models often produce timestamped claims with high confidence even when unsupported by the cited frame. This deceptive hallucination arises because timestamps imply grounding without ensuring correctness, increasing user trust but not accuracy. We introduce a pip...
An evaluation method is proposed that pinpoints which agent introduced each error by locally testing agent invocations for faithfulness and verifiability relative to their own inputs and proposes a four-type taxonomy to categorize the discovered errors: hallucination, uncited input reliance, uncited output, or insuffic...
Eran Hirsch, David Wan, Han Wang et al.· 1 citation
A research proposal can describe an established mechanism correctly while claiming to introduce it. We study whether providing the earlier paper corrects such contribution claims. Three controlled experiments compare proposals generated with a contribution-bearing prior and a same-topic control. Providing the prior yie...
Hong-Yi Du, Tian-Yi Zhang, Heng Wang et al.· 0 citations
NovGauge is presented, a human-anchored benchmark for fine-grained novelty assessment diagnosis, and a cascading diagnostic pipeline that verifies per-dimension correctness, evidence grounding, and logical support is proposed.
Guo-Qiang Zhang, Ke-Xin Tan, Ming Zhang et al.· 0 citations
This work constructed a dataset for Japanese claim decomposition and designed detailed guidelines for claim decomposition, ensuring that the extracted claims are in a form useful for fact-checking and that the decomposition rules mitigate annotator variability.
Miwa Masano, Ribeka Keyaki, Atsushi Keyaki et al.· International Conference on...· 0 citations