Human-Anchored Factuality Evaluation with Strategic Annotation

LLM-based factuality judges provide scalable evaluation signals, but their metrics are often systematically biased relative to human judgments. We study human-anchored factuality evaluation under limited annotation budgets, where judge predictions on the full dataset are combined with human labels on a small selectively sampled subset to obtain statistically valid estimates. The efficiency of this approach depends critically on which examples receive human annotation: in factuality evaluation, judge-human misalignment is not driven solely by low confidence, but also by structured failure modes such as incomplete evidence, temporal mismatch, unverifiable claims, and rubric misalignment. To exploit this structure, we introduce a factuality-specific annotation policy design pipeline that uses failure-space analysis (FSA) to derive diverse predictive signals for modeling human-judge misalignment. On an internal reference-based factuality evaluation system (AutoFA) and RAGTruth, where judge-predicted estimates substantially underestimate human-annotated factual accuracy, our FSA-guided policy improves annotation efficiency over uniform sampling and uncertainty-driven baselines, achieving effective-sample-size gains of 40.3% on AutoFA and 27.1% on RAGTruth.

Generative artificial intelligence for reliable mechanistic reasoning for corrosion

Corrosion accounts for approximately 4% of global GDP, and reliable prediction is essential for timely mitigation. Machine learning effectively predicts corrosion rates from composition, microstructure, and environmental variables, but cannot explain the underlying mechanisms. A reliable approach in safety-critical materials engineering requires not only accurate retrieval but also mechanistically defensible reasoning, a capability that existing factuality metrics cannot assess. This work presents a domain-adapted retrieval-augmented generation framework for corrosion knowledge synthesis, demonstrated on magnesium alloy corrosion. Three open-weight language models (Llama-3.1-8B, Qwen-2.5-7B, Mistral-7B) are fine-tuned on 3,309 expert-verified question-answer pairs from 840 peer-reviewed papers and integrated with a hybrid dense-lexical retrieval pipeline. Retrieval augmentation produces Token F1 gains of 143-194%, with system faithfulness of 0.964 and context recall of 0.988. Blind external validation on newly published literature and in-house electrochemical data confirms trend-level generalisation. Reason Map, a proposition-graph framework, is further introduced; it independently constructs directed evidence graphs from generated answers and retrieved literature, enabling systematic detection of causal direction inversions and unsupported inferential leaps that flat factuality metrics cannot expose. The modular architecture can be applied across domains, offering a generalizable blueprint for trustworthy AI-assisted knowledge synthesis to circumvent corrosion, which can also be applied to other engineering domains.

TriQua: Reconciling Granularity and Context in Factuality Evaluation

The "decompose-then-verify" paradigm for LLM factuality evaluation faces a fundamental trade-off: atomic facts, i.e., one sentence conveying one unit of information, often omit essential context, while broader statements lack the granularity needed for precise assessment. To address this, we introduce TriQua, a framework that flexibly models facts based on their complexity. Simple claims are extracted as standard triples, while complex claims are represented as hyperrelational facts by attaching auxiliary contextual qualifiers. This adaptive structure preserves the necessary context for accurate retrieval and verification without sacrificing atomicity. Furthermore, TriQua's verification process directly annotates concrete errors within specific triples and qualifiers, providing fine-grained explainability for error detection. Alongside the framework, we propose TriQuaScore to quantify the factuality of these structured fact units. Empirical evaluations show that TriQuaScore strongly aligns with human annotated factuality scores, TriQua achieves robust decomposition quality, and outperforms existing decomposition-based frameworks in evidence-based fact verification.

Does Finetuning with Scientific Data Increase Hallucinations? A Multi-domain Factuality Evaluation of LLMs

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to communicate and explain scientific concepts, yet their tendency to hallucinate poses significant risks in this high stakes use-case. Prior scientific hallucination evaluation work remains largely restricted to the biomedical domain, treats hallucination as a binary task, and has not examined the growing family of scientifically fine-tuned LLMs. We address these gaps with SciFactCheck, a benchmark of 2,500 prompts across five scientific domains, paired with a modular evaluation framework targeting three factuality hallucination types: unverifiability, overclaim, and attribution. Using a controlled minimal-pairing design, we evaluate 18 LLMs by comparing each scientifically fine-tuned model against its general-purpose base. Our results indicate that 1. Scientifically fine-tuned models exhibit degraded factual reliability across all hallucination types and scientific domains, and 2. Fine-tuned models are internally less confident yet linguistically more assertive. A human pilot study further reveals that current fact-checking tools show only modest agreement with expert judgments on scientific content, and that defining scientifically check-worthy claims remains contested even among human annotators. Our findings fundamentally challenge current methods of domain-specific fine-tuning for factuality and call for developing improved verification infrastructure for scientific content.

ElementCheck: Complexity-Aware Long-Form Text Factuality Evaluation via Sentence Elements

Existing long-form factuality evaluation relies on the decompose-retrieve-verify pipeline. However, the pipeline suffers from noise from claim decomposition and fixed verification granularity, resulting in unreliable results. We propose ElementCheck, a complexity-aware framework that verifies long-form outputs via sentence elements. Instead of uniformly decomposing sentences into atomic sub-claims, ElementCheck extracts entity pairs that are explicitly linked through verifiable connections in the original sentence as elements, and organizes these into an element graph. The graph topology provides a structural signal for estimating sentence complexity, enabling direct verification for simple sentences and targeted element-level refinement and verification for complex ones. To support fine-grained evaluation, we construct a new benchmark \textbf{FastFact-Sent} by mapping isolated claims from FastFact-Bench back to their source sentences. Experiments on FastFact-Sent and two domain-specific benchmarks show ElementCheck consistently improves factuality verification across five backbone models while maintaining a favorable accuracy-cost trade-off. Further analyses demonstrate that complexity-aware verification reduces unnecessary re-verification and maintains stability across different backbones. The code is available at \href{https://github.com/gudehhh666/elementcheck.git}{Here}.