RefChecker VS hallucination-leaderboard

RefChecker operates through a 3-stage pipeline: 1. Triplets Extraction: Utilizes LLMs to break down text into knowledge triplets for detailed analysis. 2. Checker Stage: Predicts hallucination labels on the extracted triplets using LLM-based or NLI-based checkers. 3. Aggregation: Combines individual triplet-level results to determine the overall hallucination label for the input text based on predefined rules. Additionally, RefChecker includes a human labeling tool, a search engine for Zero Context settings, and a localization model to map knowledge triplets back to reference snippets for comprehensive analysis. Triplets in the context of RefChecker refer to knowledge units extracted from text using Large Language Models (LLMs). These triplets consist of three elements that capture essential information from the text. The extraction of triplets helps in finer-grained detection and evaluation of claims by breaking down the original text into structured components for analysis. The triplets play a crucial role in detecting hallucinations and assessing the factual accuracy of claims made by language models. RefChecker includes support for various Large Language Models (LLMs) that can be used locally for processing and analysis. Some of the popular LLMs supported by RefChecker include GPT4, GPT-3.5-Turbo, InstructGPT, Falcon, Alpaca, LLaMA2, and Claude 2. These models can be utilized within the RefChecker framework for tasks such as response generation, claim extraction, and hallucination detection without the need for external connections to cloud-based services. I did not use it as it requires integration with several other providers or a large GPU for Mistral model. But this looks very promising and In future I will come back to this one (depends on how much I want to spend on GPU for my open source project)

To checkout the Hallucination leaderboard click here

Nice to see yet another open source approach to LLM/RAG. For those who do not want to meddle with the complexity of do-it-youself, Vectara (https://vectara.com) provides a RAG-as-a-service approach - pretty helpful if you want to stay away from having to worry about all the details, scalability, security, etc - and just focus on building your RAG application.

Check this leaderboard, it is specific for RAG use case: https://github.com/vectara/hallucination-leaderboard

You should also check us out (https://vectara.com) - we provide RAG as a service so you don't have to do all the heavy lifting and putting together the pieces yourself.

Llama 2 (and variants). Has the lowest hallucination rate (https://github.com/vectara/hallucination-leaderboard), and its open source and so we know what went into it, and the community can improve it

This is just typical of so much work in the field. They pick and choose which models to compare against and on which benchmarks. If this model was truly great, they would be comparing against Claude 2 and GPT4 across a bunch of different benchmarks. Instead they compare against Palm 2, which in a lot of tests is a weak model (https://venturebeat.com/ai/google-bard-fails-to-deliver-on-i....) and prone to hallucination (https://github.com/vectara/hallucination-leaderboard).