Latent-Space Intervention for Cross-Lingual Factual Consistency: Consistency Improvements without Accuracy Drops

Large Language Models (LLMs) often answer the same factual question differently across languages. We study whether cross-lingual latent-space intervention can reduce this inconsistency. We train layer-specific autoencoders on parallel multilingual representations and apply inference-time corrections to factual QA prompts. We find that latent intervention improves geometric alignment between languages, and that this improvement translates into consistent gains in cross-lingual consistency with English across both open-ended and multiple-choice QA formats, without degrading factual accuracy. In open-ended QA, Spearman's rank correlation between English and non-English languages improves substantially, with gains of 0.16 for English-Arabic and 0.20 for English-Russian pairs. In multiple-choice QA, answer agreement with English improves consistently across both KLAR and mParaRel. Ablations show that AE reconstruction yields consistent gains at no accuracy cost, while PCA projection contributes marginally, and mean-shift produces substantially larger consistency gains in open-ended QA at the cost of some accuracy.

Blind Men and the Elephant: Probing the Epistemic Myopia of LLMs under Long-Tail Divergent Knowledge

Factual question answering (QA) typically assumes a single canonical answer, obscuring whether large language models (LLMs) retain divergent accounts of long-tail facts. To address this gap, we introduce ElephantBench, a closed-book knowledge probe comprising 1,094 questions generated through an auditable graph-based pipeline. The pipeline retrieves related documents from a low-exposure web corpus, identifies naturally occurring disagreements, and converts them into multi-account QA records. Each answer is verified against the originating documents and authoritative public web sources and is then reviewed by human annotators. Across 32 models, even the strongest model recovers both accounts on only 52.4% of questions, while on nearly all remaining questions it recalls one account but omits the other. Scaling model size and inference-time reasoning improve recall but do not eliminate this incompleteness. Corpus analysis further shows that exposure imbalance favors the dominant account, whereas greater minority-side exposure is associated with more complete recall. These findings establish ElephantBench as a reproducible knowledge probe for diagnosing epistemic myopia in parametric memory. More broadly, our graph-based benchmark construction pipeline provides an efficient and scalable way to turn long-tail corpora into source-traceable knowledge probes, supporting efforts to evaluate and advance the epistemic rigour of next-generation LLMs. Code is available at https://github.com/Tencent/ElephantBench.

From Storage to Access: Verifiable Activation of Parametric Knowledge in LLMs via Explicit Priming and Implicit Reasoning

Although Large Language Models (LLMs) encode rich factual knowledge in their parameters, reliably recalling and verifying such knowledge remains a key bottleneck in factual question answering. Existing end-to-end methods entangle knowledge elicitation with reasoning, making it difficult to determine whether correct answers arise from parametric knowledge or the input context. To address this challenge, we propose VAKE (Verifiable Activation of Parametric KnowledgE), a two-stage reinforcement-learning framework that externalizes latent parametric knowledge through explicit Priming and transfers the acquired elicitation capability to implicit Reasoning. Given a query and an insufficient retrieved subgraph, the Priming policy explicitly inserts bridging triples as verifiable evidence, with supervision provided by rewards derived from answers generated by a separate frozen model over the augmented subgraph. Building on the policy learned during Priming, the Reasoning stage trains the model to answer from the original input, testing whether the capability acquired through explicit knowledge elicitation transfers to implicit reasoning. Experiments across seven benchmarks and models from 3B to 14B show that VAKE consistently outperforms standard baselines, including when transferring directly from HotpotQA to OOD datasets. LLM-based evaluation further shows that over 80% of the inserted triples provide factual bridging knowledge not derivable from the retrieved context, while more than half elicit knowledge inaccessible through direct prompting. These results suggest that VAKE activates latent parametric knowledge rather than copying the input context or memorizing dataset-specific associations.

Can a Model Catch Its Own Hallucinations for Free?: Label-Free Doubt Signals Hold Their Own Against a Labelled Dataset for Abstention

Large language models state false facts as fluently as true ones, yet a model often "knows" internally when it is on shaky ground: the probability it assigns to its own answer tends to dip on the facts it gets wrong. The usual way to act on this, teaching a model to abstain rather than guess, requires a labelled dataset of right and wrong answers. We ask whether the model's own confidence, which is free and needs no labels, can do that job instead. We fine-tune each model (with LoRA) to answer when its frozen confidence is high and to say "I'm not sure" when it is low, using the signal alone and no correctness labels. Across six open-weights models (1B-8B, two families) on short-form factual question answering, with correctness adjudicated by an independent judge model, this label-free recipe holds its own against label-supervised abstention-tuning: at matched coverage we find no statistically detectable difference between the two. A control that drills hard examples instead of abstaining does not help, indicating the gain comes from calibration, not rote memorization. The signal's one blind spot is confidently wrong facts, which it cannot flag. A model's own doubt is thus a near-free substitute for a labelled dataset when teaching it when to abstain. Code and artifacts are available on request.

The First Token Knows: Single-Decode Confidence for Hallucination Detection

Self-consistency detects hallucinations by generating multiple sampled answers to a question and measuring agreement, but this requires repeated decoding and can be sensitive to lexical variation. Semantic self-consistency improves this by clustering sampled answers by meaning using natural language inference, but it adds both sampling cost and external inference overhead. We show that first-token confidence, phi_first, computed from the normalized entropy of the top-K logits at the first content-bearing answer token of a single greedy decode, matches or modestly exceeds semantic self-consistency on closed-book short-answer factual question answering. Across three 7-8B instruction-tuned models and two benchmarks, phi_first achieves a mean AUROC of 0.820, compared with 0.793 for semantic agreement and 0.791 for standard surface-form self-consistency. A subsumption test shows that phi_first is moderately to strongly correlated with semantic agreement, and combining the two signals yields only a small AUROC improvement over phi_first alone. These results suggest that much of the uncertainty information captured by multi-sample agreement is already available in the model's initial token distribution. We argue that phi_first should be reported as a default low-cost baseline before invoking sampling-based uncertainty estimation.