The increasing reliance on natural language generation (NLG) models, particularly large language models, has raised concerns about the reliability and accuracy of their outputs. A key challenge is hallucination, where models produce plausible but incorrect information. As a result, hallucination detection has become a critical task. In this work, we introduce a comprehensive hallucination taxonomy with 11 categories across various NLG tasks and propose the HAllucination Detection (HAD) models, which integrate hallucination detection, span-level identification, and correction into a single inference process. Trained on an elaborate synthetic dataset of about 90K samples, our HAD models are versatile and can be applied to various NLG tasks. We also carefully annotate a test set for hallucination detection, called HADTest, which contains 2,248 samples. Evaluations on in-domain and out-of-domain test sets show that our HAD models generally outperform the existing baselines, achieving state-of-the-art results on HaluEval, FactCHD, and FaithBench, confirming their robustness and versatility.

In NLG meta-evaluation, evaluation metrics are typically assessed based on their consistency with humans. However, we identify some limitations in traditional NLG meta-evaluation approaches, such as issues in handling human ratings and ambiguous selections of correlation measures, which undermine the effectiveness of meta-evaluation. In this work, we propose a dual-perspective NLG meta-evaluation framework that focuses on different evaluation capabilities, thereby providing better interpretability. In addition, we introduce a method of automatically constructing the corresponding benchmarks without requiring new human annotations. Furthermore, we conduct experiments with 16 representative LLMs as the evaluators based on our proposed framework, comprehensively analyzing their evaluation performance from different perspectives.