Hallucination
AI RiskLLMs can generate content that is nonsensical or unfaithful to the provided source content with appeared great confidence, known as hallucination
Overview
A source-backed snapshot of this AI risk.
Risk profile
How the MIT AI Risk Repository categorizes this risk.
Merged risk records
Source records unified into this canonical risk concept.
MITRISK-Liu2024-30.01.02 - Hallucination
LLMs can generate content that is nonsensical or unfaithful to the provided source content with appeared great confidence, known as hallucination
MITRISK-IBM2025-65.18.01 - Hallucination
"Hallucinations generate factually inaccurate or untruthful content with respect to the model’s training data or input. This is also sometimes referred to lack of faithfulness or lack of groundedness."
MITRISK-Nah2023-33.02.01 - Hallucination
"Hallucination is a widely recognized limitation of generative AI and it can include textual, auditory, visual or other types of hallucination (Alkaissi & McFarlane, 2023). Hallucination refers to the phenomenon in which the contents generated are nonsensical or unfaithful to the given source input (Ji et al., 2023). Azamfirei et al. (2023) indicated that "fabricating information" or fabrication is a better term to describe the hallucination phenomenon. Generative AI can generate seemingly correct responses yet make no sense. Misinformation is an outcome of hallucination. Generative AI models may respond with fictitious information, fake photos or information with factual errors (Dwivedi et al., 2023). Susarla et al. (2023) regarded hallucination as a serious challenge in the use of generative AI for scholarly activities. When asked to provide literature relevant to a specific topic, ChatGPT could generate inaccurate or even nonexistent literature. Current state-of-the-art AI models can only mimic human-like responses without understanding the underlying meaning (Shubhendu & Vijay, 2013). Hallucination is, in general, dangerous in certain contexts, such as in seeking advice for medical treatments without any consultation or thorough evaluation by experts, i.e., medical doctors (Sallam, 2023)."
MITRISK-Wang2025-74.01.06 - Hallucination
"Despite the rapid advancement of LLMs, hallucinations have emerged as one of the most vital concerns surrounding their use [54, 79, 86, 110, 242]. Hallucinations are often referred to as LLMs’ generating content that is nonfactual or unfaithful to the provided information [54, 79, 86, 242]. Therefore, hallucinations can be typically categorized into two main classes. The first is factuality hallucination, which describes the discrepancy between LLMs’ generated content and real-world facts. For example, if LLMs mistakenly take Charles Lindbergh as the first person who walked on the moon, it is a factuality hallucination [79]. The second is faithfulness hallucination, which describes the discrepancy between the generated content and the context provided by the user’s instructions or input, as well as the internal coherence of the generated content itself. For example, when LLMs perform the summarizing task, they occasionally tamper with some key information by mistakes, which is a faithfulness hallucination."
Mitigations
Defenses that may help with related attacks.
Source evidence
Research source for this risk, when available.
Included resource
Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignment
Original source
MIT AI Risk Repository
Open the public repository used for AI risk records and taxonomy fields.
