this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
67 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

82518 readers
3964 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
67
How Much Do LLMs Hallucinate in Document Q&A Scenarios? A 172-Billion-Token Study Across Temperatures, Context Lengths, and Hardware Platforms [TLDR: 25%] (arxiv.org)
submitted 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) by RandAlThor@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Evaluating 35 open-weight models across three context lengths (32K, 128K, 200K), four temperatures, and three hardware platforms—consuming 172 billion tokens across more than 4,000 runs—we find that the answer is “substantially, and unavoidably.” Even under optimal conditions—best model, best temperature, temperature chosen specifically to minimize fabrication—the floor is non-zero and rises steeply with context length. At 32K, the best model (GLM 4.5) fabricates 1.19% of answers, top-tier models fabricate 5–7%, and the median model fabricates roughly 25%.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] snooggums@piefed.world 7 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

Calculators are correct 100% of the time.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Calculators are not people, Mr. <1.19%.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

That's right! We should be comparing computers to computers. Well, hardware computers, not people computers.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

Calculators are not computers, computers contain calculator-like elements but a calculator is no more a computer than a passenger jet is a coffee shop by virtue of having a coffee pot onboard.

Calculators cannot fabricate answers, but nor are they 100% correct due to things like bitflips and square root approximations. They also cannot write text, so the comparison would make even less sense.

LLMs and Humans can fabricate answers in written text so comparing the fabrication rate in written text of an LLM to a human (both entities which generate their answers with neural networks) makes more sense than to compare either to a calculator which neither uses a neural network or produces text.

So 'we' should compare like things and not choose items based on superficial similarities.

[–] ji59@hilariouschaos.com -1 points 14 hours ago

What do you even mean? Calculators and LLMs are solving different problems. And there are a lot of calculators and a lot of LLMs. Also, calculator accuracy could be approaching 0% because they all have limited precision and there are infinite numbers. Some of the calculators even can't correctly answer 0.1+0.2, while most LLMs can do that.