SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2511.11600

CausalGuard: A Smart System for Detecting and Preventing False Information in Large Language Models

Abstract

While large language models have transformed how we interact with AI systems, they have a critical weakness: they confidently state false information that sounds entirely plausible. This "hallucination" problem has become a major barrier to using these models where accuracy matters most. Existing solutions either require retraining the entire model, add significant computational costs, or miss the root causes of why these hallucinations occur in the first place. We present CausalGuard, a new approach that combines causal reasoning with symbolic logic to catch and prevent hallucinations as they happen. Unlike previous methods that only check outputs after generation, our system understands the causal chain that leads to false statements and intervenes early in the process. CausalGuard works through two complementary paths: one that traces causal relationships between what the model knows and what it generates, and another that checks logical consistency using automated reasoning. Testing across twelve different benchmarks, we found that CausalGuard correctly identifies hallucinations 89.3\% of the time while missing only 8.3\% of actual hallucinations. More importantly, it reduces false claims by nearly 80\% while keeping responses natural and helpful. The system performs especially well on complex reasoning tasks where multiple steps of logic are required. Because CausalGuard shows its reasoning process, it works well in sensitive areas like medical diagnosis or financial analysis where understanding why a decision was made matters as much as the decision itself.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Piyushkumar Patel. 2025-10-30. CausalGuard: A Smart System for Detecting and Preventing False Information in Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.11600

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI