What do Geometric Hallucination Detection Metrics Actually Measure?

Read full text
Authors: Eric Yeats, John Buckheit, Sarah Scullen, Brendan Kennedy, Loc Truong, Davis Brown, Bill Kay, Cliff Joslyn, Tegan Emerson, Michael J. Henry, John A. Emanuello, Henry Kvinge
Cited by: 0

Abstract

Hallucination remains a barrier to deploying generative models in high-consequence applications. This is especially true in cases where external ground truth is not readily available to validate model outputs. This situation has motivated the study of geometric signals in the internal state of an LLM that are predictive of hallucination and require limited external knowledge. Given that there are a range of factors that can lead model output to be called a hallucination (e.g., irrelevance vs incoherence), in this paper we ask what specific properties of a hallucination these geometric statistics actually capture. To assess this, we generate a synthetic dataset which varies distinct properties of output associated with hallucination. This includes output correctness, confidence, relevance, coherence, and completeness. We find that different geometric statistics capture different types of hallucinations. Along the way we show that many existing geometric detection methods have substantial sensitivity to shifts in task domain (e.g., math questions vs. history questions). Motivated by this, we introduce a simple normalization method to mitigate the effect of domain shift on geometric statistics, leading to AUROC gains of +34 points in multi-domain settings.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Topic Modeling Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Publication details

Journal / source
arXiv (Cornell University)
Publication date
9 February 2026
Language
EN
Document type
Preprint