Track the frontier, from condensed matter to cosmology.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces CHARM, a benchmark designed to evaluate character hallucination in role-playing large language models (LLMs) by distinguishing between Boundary-Awareness and Boundary-Compliance. Through a two-stage evaluation process involving 40 characters from diverse cultural-linguistic backgrounds, the study reveals that LLMs often recognize when a query is out of scope but still provide incorrect answers, indicating a predominance of compliance failures. The findings highlight significant cultural variations in these failures, suggesting that representation imbalances in model training data affect performance across different characters.
LLMs frequently recognize boundary violations yet still generate out-of-character responses, revealing a critical compliance failure in character role-play.
Role-playing large language models (LLMs) are expected to adopt a character's style while also respecting that character's knowledge boundaries. Prior evaluations detect character hallucination but rarely distinguish whether errors arise from failure to recognize a boundary or from failure to comply despite recognition. We introduce CHARM, a multicultural benchmark of 40 real and fictional characters drawn from five cultural-linguistic regions, and validated by native reviewers. It probes two boundary types, Temporal (historical vs. modern) and Cross-Universe (entities outside a character's narrative or historical universe), using abstention-enabled multiple-choice questions. We propose a two-stage evaluation that separates Boundary-Awareness (explicit recognition that a query is out of scope) from Boundary-Compliance (abstention when answering concrete questions). Evaluations across six LLMs show that hallucination is driven predominantly by compliance failures. Models frequently acknowledge that a query lies outside the character's knowledge yet still provide factual, out-of-character answers. By re-posing the same questions to the target character, we confirm that a large fraction of these cases are verified parametric overrides; the model stores the relevant fact but fails to suppress it. We also observe systematic cultural variation in these failures, consistent with imbalances in how characters from different regions are represented in model knowledge.