ACL Findings2025
From Misleading Queries to Accurate Answers: A Three-Stage Fine-Tuning Method for LLMs
Guocong Li, Weize Liu, Yihang Wu, Ping Wang, Shuaihan Huang, Hongxia Xu, Jian Wu
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit excellent performance in natural language processing (NLP), but remain highly sensitive to the quality of input queries, especially when these queries contain misleading or inaccurate information. Existing methods focus on correcting the output, but they often overlook the potential of improving the ability of LLMs to detect and correct misleading content in the input itself. In this paper, we propose a novel three-stage fine-tuning method that enhances the ability of LLMs to detect and correct misleading information in the input, further improving response accuracy and reducing hallucinations. Specifically, the three stages include (1) training LLMs to identify misleading information, (2) training LLMs to correct the misleading information using built-in or external knowledge, and (3) training LLMs to generate accurate answers based on the corrected queries. To evaluate our method, we conducted experiments on three datasets for the hallucination detection task and the question answering (QA) task, as well as two datasets containing misleading information that we constructed. The experimental results demonstrate that our method significantly improves the accuracy and factuality of LLM responses, while also enhancing the ability to detect hallucinations and reducing the generation of hallucinations in the output, particularly when the query contains misleading information. 1
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Lune answers from
the full paper · 2 top-tier papers that cite it · related work
Free to start. No credit card required.
Cited by top-tier papers2
- Stable-RAG: Mitigating Retrieval-Permutation-Induced Hallucinations in Retrieval-Augmented GenerationQianchi Zhang, Hainan Zhang, Liang Pang, Hongwei Zheng et al.ACL 2026 · 3 citations
- Debate-of-Thoughts: Resolving Knowledge Conflicts in LLMs Through Internal DeliberationGuocong Li, Qirui Hu, Ping Wang, Guofeng Zhang et al.ACL 2026
Builds on14
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-FeedbackAman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 4,972 citations
- TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human FalsehoodsStephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, Owain EvansACL 2022 · 3,228 citations
- Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language UnderstandingYixin Nie, Adina Williams, Emily Dinan, Mohit Bansal et al.ACL 2020 · 602 citations
- Can LLM-Generated Misinformation Be Detected?Canyu Chen, Kai ShuICLR 2024 · 270 citations
Related papers
- InterrogateLLM: Zero-Resource Hallucination Detection in LLM-Generated AnswersYakir Yehuda, Itzik Malkiel, Oren Barkan, Jonathan Weill et al.ACL 2024
- The Dawn After the Dark: An Empirical Study on Factuality Hallucination in Large Language ModelsJunyi Li, Jie Chen, Ruiyang Ren, Xiaoxue Cheng et al.ACL 2024 · 49 citations
- Does Fine-Tuning LLMs on New Knowledge Encourage Hallucinations?Zorik Gekhman, Gal Yona, Roee Aharoni, Matan Eyal et al.EMNLP 2024 · 53 citations
- ReFL: Reflective Feedback Learning for Hallucination Detection of Large Language ModelsCunhang Fan, Jun Zhang, Xue Zhang, Shuai Zhang et al.ACL 2026
- DoLa: Decoding by Contrasting Layers Improves Factuality in Large Language ModelsYung-Sung Chuang, Yujia Xie, Hongyin Luo, Yoon Kim et al.ICLR 2024 · 354 citations
