How Much Do LLMs Hallucinate across Languages? On Realistic Multilingual Estimation of LLM Hallucination
Saad Obaid ul Islam, Anne Lauscher, Goran Glavas
Abstract
In the age of misinformation, hallucinationthe 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 realistic settings than open information seeking. In contrast, we aim to quantify the extent of LLM hallucination across languages in knowledge-intensive longform question answering (LFQA). 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 translate-train a detection model. 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 opendomain QA dataset for 30 languages with LLMgenerated prompts and Wikipedia articles as references. Our analysis shows that LLMs, in absolute terms, hallucinate more tokens in highresource languages due to longer responses, but that the actual hallucination rates (i.e., normalized for length) seems uncorrelated with the sizes of languages' digital footprints. We also find that smaller LLMs hallucinate more, and significantly, LLMs with broader language support display higher hallucination rates.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext ab67fc1c-9b24-48de-908a-3c81ef41ae91Builds on15
- Large Language Models are Zero-Shot ReasonersTakeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 8,168 citations
- QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMsTim Dettmers, Artidoro Pagnoni, Ari Holtzman, Luke ZettlemoyerNeurIPS 2023 · 5,863 citations
- TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human FalsehoodsStephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, Owain EvansACL 2022 · 3,228 citations
- SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language ModelsPotsawee Manakul, Adian Liusie, Mark J. F. GalesEMNLP 2023 · 331 citations
- FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text GenerationSewon Min, Kalpesh Krishna, Xinxi Lyu, Mike Lewis et al.EMNLP 2023 · 225 citations
Related papers
- K-HALU: Multiple Answer Korean Hallucination Benchmark for Large Language ModelsJaehyung Seo, Heuiseok LimICLR 2025
- 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
- ANAH: Analytical Annotation of Hallucinations in Large Language ModelsZiwei Ji, Yuzhe Gu, Wenwei Zhang, Chengqi Lyu et al.ACL 2024 · 8 citations
- Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models with Metamorphic RelationsBorui Yang, Md Afif Al Mamun, Jie M. Zhang, Gias UddinFSE 2025 · 14 citations
- CCFQA: A Benchmark for Cross-Lingual and Cross-Modal Speech and Text Factuality EvaluationYexing Du, Kaiyuan Liu, Youcheng Pan, Zheng Chu et al.AAAI 2026 · 4 citations
