Abstract:Hallucination detection methods for large language models increasingly operate on chain-of-thought reasoning traces, yet it remains unclear whether they evaluate the reasoning itself or merely exploit surface correlates of the final answer. We introduce a controlled-invariance methodology that exposes this distinction through two oracle tests: \textsc{Force}, which replaces each response's final answer with the ground truth while preserving the reasoning trace, and \textsc{Remove}, which strips answer-announcement steps while leaving the trajectory intact. This reveals if their predictive power derives from answer-level artifacts rather than from the structure or validity of intermediate reasoning. We further show that once these artifacts are controlled for, effective detection does not necessarily require complex learned representations: TRACT, a lightweight scorer built on lexical trajectory features (hedging trends, step-length dynamics, and cross-response vocabulary convergence), achieves strong robustness while remaining competitive with or outperforming existing baselines on unperturbed traces. These findings suggest that the current central challenge in reasoning-aware hallucination detection is not the absence of signal in the trace, but the failure to isolate it from endpoint cues.
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.08346 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2605.08346v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.08346 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) |
Submission history
From: Manish Bhattarai [view email]
[v1]
Fri, 8 May 2026 18:00:58 UTC (3,834 KB)