Detecting hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) remains a fundamental challenge for their trustworthy deployment. Going beyond basic uncertainty-driven hallucination detection frameworks, we propose a simple yet powerful method that quantifies uncertainty by measuring the effective rank of hidden states derived from multiple model outputs and different layers. Grounded in the spectral analysis of representations, our approach provides interpretable insights into the model's internal reasoning process through semantic variations, while requiring no extra knowledge or additional modules, thus offering a combination of theoretical elegance and practical efficiency. Meanwhile, we theoretically demonstrate the necessity of quantifying uncertainty both internally (representations of a single response) and externally (different responses), providing a justification for using representations among different layers and responses from LLMs to detect hallucinations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method effectively detects hallucinations and generalizes robustly across various scenarios, contributing to a new paradigm of hallucination detection for LLM truthfulness.

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) in Large Language Models (LLMs) is essential for their safe and reliable deployment, particularly in critical applications where incorrect outputs can have serious consequences. Current UQ methods typically rely on querying the model multiple times using non-zero temperature sampling to generate diverse outputs for uncertainty estimation. However, the impact of selecting a given temperature parameter is understudied, and our analysis reveals that temperature plays a fundamental role in the quality of uncertainty estimates. The conventional approach of identifying optimal temperature values requires expensive hyperparameter optimization (HPO) that must be repeated for each new model-dataset combination. We propose Monte Carlo Temperature (MCT), a robust sampling strategy that eliminates the need for temperature calibration. Our analysis reveals that: 1) MCT provides more robust uncertainty estimates across a wide range of temperatures, 2) MCT improves the performance of UQ methods by replacing fixed-temperature strategies that do not rely on HPO, and 3) MCT achieves statistical parity with oracle temperatures, which represent the ideal outcome of a well-tuned but computationally expensive HPO process. These findings demonstrate that effective UQ can be achieved without the computational burden of temperature parameter calibration.

Large Language Models (LLMs) display formidable capabilities in generative tasks but also pose potential risks due to their tendency to generate hallucinatory responses. Uncertainty Quantification (UQ), the evaluation of model output reliability, is crucial for ensuring the safety and robustness of AI systems. Recent studies have concentrated on model uncertainty by analyzing the relationship between output entropy under various sampling conditions and the corresponding labels. However, these methods primarily focus on measuring model entropy with precision to capture response characteristics, often neglecting the uncertainties associated with greedy decoding results-the sources of model labels, which can lead to biased classification outcomes. In this paper, we explore the biases introduced by greedy decoding and propose a label-confidence-aware (LCA) uncertainty estimation based on Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence bridging between samples and label source, thus enhancing the reliability and stability of uncertainty assessments. Our empirical evaluations across a range of popular LLMs and NLP datasets reveal that different label sources can indeed affect classification, and that our approach can effectively capture differences in sampling results and label sources, demonstrating more effective uncertainty estimation.

While large language models (LLMs) have taken great strides towards helping humans with a plethora of tasks like search and summarization, hallucinations remain a major impediment towards gaining user trust. The fluency and coherence of model generations even when hallucinating makes it difficult to detect whether or not a model is hallucinating. In this work, we explore if the artifacts associated with the model generations can provide hints that the generation will contain hallucinations. Specifically, we probe LLMs at 1) the inputs via Integrated Gradients based token attribution, 2) the outputs via the Softmax probabilities, and 3) the internal state via self-attention and fully-connected layer activations for signs of hallucinations on open-ended question answering tasks. Our results show that the distributions of these artifacts differ between hallucinated and non-hallucinated generations. Building on this insight, we train binary classifiers that use these artifacts as input features to classify model generations into hallucinations and non-hallucinations. These hallucination classifiers achieve up to 0.80 AUROC. We further show that tokens preceding a hallucination can predict the subsequent hallucination before it occurs.