Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces HalluTruthQA, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate hallucination detection, localization, and explanation in Arabic question answering systems. By providing 2,400 expert-curated examples across diverse domains, the benchmark allows for a nuanced assessment of LLMs' performance, revealing that no single model excels across all evaluation tasks. The findings highlight the need for a multifaceted approach to hallucination evaluation, as the best-performing models achieved varying scores in detection, localization, factual verification, and explanation tasks.
No single Arabic LLM can master hallucination detection, localization, and explanation, revealing critical gaps in current models' capabilities.
Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent Arabic answers, yet factual errors remain difficult to detect, localize, explain, and verify. Existing hallucination benchmarks often provide response-level labels, with limited support for identifying the exact erroneous content, explaining why it is incorrect, or selecting the correct factual answer. We introduce \textsc{HalluTruthQA}, a fine-grained benchmark for hallucination evaluation in Arabic question answering. The benchmark contains 2,400 expert-curated examples across four knowledge-intensive domains: Islamic knowledge, history, science, and geography. Each example pairs an Arabic question and a model-generated answer with a verified reference answer, a binary hallucination label, six candidate answers for factual verification, and, for hallucinated answers, character-level erroneous spans, human-written explanations, and macro and micro hallucination types. We evaluate four open-source LLMs, \textsc{Allam}, \textsc{Falcon-H1}, \textsc{Qwen32}, and \textsc{Silma}, in a zero-shot setting across hallucination detection, span-level localization, factual verification, and explanation evaluation. Results show that these tasks capture different abilities: no single model achieves the strongest performance across all tasks, with best scores of 0.880 Macro-F1 for detection, 0.516 F1-Sp for localization, 0.852 LO-Score for factual verification, and 0.644 final score for explanation evaluation. Our taxonomy shows that hallucination evaluation should move beyond detection toward localizing, verifying, and explaining factual errors. The code, dataset, prompts, and evaluation scripts are available at https://gitlab.com/nlpresearcher/HalluTruthQA.
