ACL Findings2026
PROBE: PROcess-Based BEnchmark for Hallucination Detection
Yu Zhang, Peter Belcak, Shizhe Diao, Yonggan Fu, Shaona Ghosh, Morteza Mardani, Eileen Margaret Peters Long, Bei Yu, Pavlo Molchanov
Abstract
Hallucination detection remains a significant challenge for large language models. Existing agentic applications rely on LLMs to selfassess the factuality of their outputs using single-step "LLM-as-a-judge" prompts. However, even when equipped with ground truth information, current LLMs still fall short in detecting hallucinations, and this one-shot evaluation offers neither the transparency nor the granularity needed to diagnose where and why the detection fails. To address this gap, we introduce PROBE (Process-based Benchmark for Hallucination Detection), a comprehensive benchmark that breaks down hallucination detection into four critical steps: claim decomposition, evidence finding, evidence evaluation, and hallucination localization, and evaluates each step individually. PROBE consists of 12,000 test cases across three task typessummarization, question answering, and style transfer. Critically, we demonstrate that when hallucination detection is treated as a multistep process, all models achieve considerably better performance. Through extensive evaluation, we show that current LLMs struggle chiefly with evidence finding, and that finetuning on our released training data substantially improves performance on this step. PROBE represents a significant step toward more transparent, diagnosable, and robust hallucination detection systems.
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.
Builds on9
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 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
- HaluEval: A Large-Scale Hallucination Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language ModelsJunyi Li, Xiaoxue Cheng, Xin Zhao, Jian-Yun Nie et al.EMNLP 2023 · 224 citations
- ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical ReasoningChujie Zheng, Zhenru Zhang, Beichen Zhang, Runji Lin et al.ACL 2025 · 209 citations
- CriticBench: Benchmarking LLMs for Critique-Correct ReasoningZicheng Lin, Zhibin Gou, Tian Liang, Ruilin Luo et al.ACL Findings 2024 · 16 citations
Related papers
- JointCQ: Improving Factual Hallucination Detection with Joint Claim and Query GenerationFan Xu, Huixuan Zhang, Zhenliang Zhang, Jiahao Wang et al.ACL Findings 2026
- Evaluating Evaluation Metrics - The Mirage of Hallucination DetectionAtharva Kulkarni, Yuan Zhang, Joel Ruben Antony Moniz, Xiou Ge et al.EMNLP Findings 2025 · 6 citations
- Simple Factuality Probes Detect Hallucinations in Long-Form Natural Language GenerationJiatong Han, Neil Band, Muhammed Razzak, Jannik Kossen et al.EMNLP Findings 2025 · 2 citations
- CogniBench: A Legal-inspired Framework and Dataset for Assessing Cognitive Faithfulness of Large Language ModelsXiaqiang Tang, Jian Li, Keyu Hu, Nan Du et al.ACL 2025 · 3 citations
- HalluMeasure: Fine-grained Hallucination Measurement Using Chain-of-Thought ReasoningShayan Ali Akbar, Md Mosharaf Hossain, Tess Wood, Si-Chi Chin et al.EMNLP 2024 · 4 citations
