Assessing the quality of Large Language Model (LLM) outputs becomes especially challenging in high-branching settings, where a single prompt yields many plausible candidates. Existing verifiers typically operate on the surface text (e.g., reward models, LLM judges, majority voting) or on confidence proxies derived from token probabilities, both of which can be brittle: the former can be influenced by stylistic artifacts, while the latter is often miscalibrated. In this paper, we study a third source of information—the model’s hidden states—for binary correctness verification in tasks with a reliable success/failure signal (e.g., deterministic checkers or reference-grounded answers). We find that correct and incorrect solutions exhibit measurable geometric differences in their hidden-state trajectories. To isolate this signal with minimal modeling assumptions, we introduce Clue (Clustering and Experience-based Verification), a training-free, non-parametric verifier. Clue summarizes each reasoning trace by an activation delta—the difference between hidden states at the start and end of the explicit reasoning span—and predicts correctness by comparing this delta to two class centroids computed from labeled experience. Across math (AIME 24/25), scientific QA (GPQA), and a multi-domain benchmark (WebInstruct-verified), Clue improves selection and reranking, with particularly strong gains on smaller or less-calibrated models. For example, on AIME 24 with a 1.5B model, Clue raises accuracy from 56.7% (majority@64) to 70.0% (top-maj@16).

Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) pose significant challenges in tasks requiring complex multi-step reasoning, such as mathematical problem-solving. Existing approaches primarily detect the presence of hallucinations but lack a nuanced understanding of their types and manifestations. In this paper, we first introduce a comprehensive taxonomy that categorizes the common hallucinations in mathematical reasoning tasks into six types. We then propose FG-PRM (Fine-Grained Process Reward Model), an augmented model designed to detect and mitigate hallucinations in a fine-grained, step-level manner. To address the limitations of manually labeling training data, we propose an automated method for generating fine-grained hallucination data using LLMs. Our FG-PRM demonstrates superior performance across two key tasks: 1) Fine-grained hallucination detection: classifying hallucination types for each reasoning step; and 2) Verification: ranking multiple LLM-generated outputs to select the most accurate solution. Our experiments show that FG-PRM excels in fine-grained hallucination detection and substantially boosts the performance of LLMs on GSM8K and MATH benchmarks. These results highlight the benefits of fine-grained supervision in enhancing the reliability and interpretability of LLM reasoning processes. Codes and datasets are available at: https://github.com/du-nlp-lab/FG-PRM.

We introduce FaithScore (Faithfulness to Atomic Image Facts Score), a reference-free and fine-grained evaluation metric that measures the faithfulness of the generated free-form answers from large vision-language models (LVLMs). The FaithScore evaluation first identifies sub-sentences containing descriptive statements that need to be verified, then extracts a comprehensive list of atomic facts from these sub-sentences, and finally conducts consistency verification between fine-grained atomic facts and the input image. Meta-evaluation demonstrates that our metric highly correlates with human judgments of faithfulness. We collect two benchmark datasets (i.e. LLaVA-1k and MSCOCO-Cap) for evaluating LVLMs instruction-following hallucinations. We measure hallucinations in state-of-the-art LVLMs with FaithScore on the datasets. Results reveal that current systems are prone to generate hallucinated content unfaithful to the image, which leaves room for future improvements. We hope our metric FaithScore can help evaluate future LVLMs in terms of faithfulness and provide insightful advice for enhancing LVLMs’ faithfulness.

Neural models, including large language models (LLMs), achieve superior performance on multi-hop question-answering. To elicit reasoning capabilities from LLMs, recent works propose using the chain-of-thought (CoT) mechanism to generate both the reasoning chain and the answer, which enhances the model’s capabilities in conducting multi-hop reasoning. However, several challenges still remain: such as struggling with inaccurate reasoning, hallucinations, and lack of interpretability. On the other hand, information extraction (IE) identifies entities, relations, and events grounded to the text. The extracted structured information can be easily interpreted by humans and machines (Grishman, 2019). In this work, we investigate constructing and leveraging extracted semantic structures (graphs) for multi-hop question answering, especially the reasoning process. Empirical results and human evaluations show that our framework: generates more faithful reasoning chains and substantially improves the QA performance on two benchmark datasets. Moreover, the extracted structures themselves naturally provide grounded explanations that are preferred by humans, as compared to the generated reasoning chains and saliency-based explanations.

In this paper, we explore a new approach based on discourse analysis for the task of intent segmentation. Our target texts are user queries from a real-world chatbot. Our results show the feasibility of our approach with an F1-score of 82.97 points, and some advantages and disadvantages compared to two machine learning baselines: BERT and LSTM+CRF.