Artificial Intelligence · 31.08.2026, 07:47 UTC
Does Finetuning with Scientific Data Increase Hallucinations? A Multi-domain Factuality Evaluation of LLMs
| Schweregrad | info |
|---|---|
| Kategorie | Artificial Intelligence |
| Quelle | arXiv cs.CL ↗ |
| Veröffentlicht | 31.08.2026 UTC |
Sicherheitsmeldung mit Schweregrad noch nicht bewertet. Technische Details im Tab „Originaltext“; empfohlene Schritte in der Checkliste.
arXiv:2606.21359v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to communicate and explain scientific concepts, yet their tendency to hallucinate poses significant risks in this high stakes use-case. Prior scientific hallucination evaluation work remains largely restricted to the biomedical domain, treats hallucination as a binary task, and has not examined the growing family of scientifically fine-tuned LLMs. We address these gaps with SciFactCheck, a benchmark of 2,500 prompts across five scientific domains, paired with a modular evaluation framework targeting three factuality hallucination types: unverifiability, overclaim, and attribution. Using a controlled minimal-pairing design, we evaluate 18 LLMs by comparing each scientifically fine-tuned model against its general-purpose base. Our results indicate that 1. Scientifically fine-tuned models exhibit degraded factual reliability across all hallucination types and scientific domains, and 2. Fine-tuned models are internally less confident yet linguistically more assertive. A human pilot study further reveals that current fact-checking tools show only modest agreement with expert judgments on scientific content, and that defining scientifically check-worthy claims remains contested even among human annotators. Our findings fundamentally challenge current methods of domain-specific fine-tuning for factuality and call for developing improved verification infrastructure for scientific content.
Maßnahmen
⬇ Als MarkdownVerwandte Beiträge
- info LWiAI Podcast #255 - Gemini 3.7, Jalapeño, Qwen 3.8, Drones
- info OpenClaw Releases OpenClaw 2.0: Guided Model Setup, 575 ms Control UI Startup, and One Trust Boundary Per Gateway
- info When Stale Constraints Go Unchecked: Budgeted Verification Failures in Inherited Agent Memory
- info Set-shifting Behavioral Test for Harnessed Agents