JHARS is a comprehensive benchmark dataset for evaluating hallucinations (the phenomenon of generating content not present in given information sources) in Japanese Large Language Models (LLMs) in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) settings.
Hallucination is a critical challenge in the practical application of Large Language Models. JHARS was developed to quantitatively evaluate and understand the characteristics of hallucinations in Japanese LLMs.
- Sentence level annotations on 450 Japanese LLM responses in RAG settings
- Evaluation of multiple state-of-the-art models (including GPT-4o)
- Performance assessment of hallucination detection methods
This dataset includes:
- 450 annotated LLM responses
- Scripts for hallucination evaluation
- Relatively low hallucination rate in LLM responses
- Evidence of critical hallucinations that warrant fact-checking
- Difficulty in achieving both high precision and recall in automatic detection
- High recall possible for critical hallucinations
{
"id": number, // Unique identifier for each QA pair
"question": string, // Question in Japanese
"reference_text": string,// Reference text used to generate answer
"[model_name]": { // Model response object (gpt-4o, gpt-4o-mini, Llama-3.1-Swallow-8B-Instruct-v0.1)
"response": string, // Model's answer in Japanese
"annotations": { // Annotation data
"aggregated": { // Consensus from multiple annotators
"is_valid_answer": boolean, // Whether response is valid
"sentence_annotations": [ // Array of sentence-level annotations
{
"sentence": string, // Target sentence
"annotation_status": string, // e.g., "completed"
"hallucination_type": string, // "No_hallucination", "Contradictory", "Unverifiable"
"hallucination_text": string[], // Identified hallucination text
"hallucination_text_start_offset": number[], // Start positions of hallucination text
"hallucination_text_end_offset": number[], // End positions of hallucination text
"verification_uncertainty_reason": string[][], // Reasons for verification uncertainty
"contradiction_uncertainty_reason": string[][], // Reasons for contradiction uncertainty
"agreement_status": string // "unanimous", "majority", "disputed"
}
]
}
}
}
}
Note on hallucination types:
- "No_hallucination": No hallucination detected
- "Contradictory": Intrinsic hallucination - content that contradicts the reference text
- "Contradictory_uncertain": Annotator uncertain about contradiction with reference
- "Unverifiable": Extrinsic hallucination - content that cannot be verified using the reference text
- "Unverifiable_uncertain": Annotator uncertain about verifiability from reference
The dataset includes two evaluation settings for hallucination types:
- Relaxed setting: Treats uncertain cases as their base types
- "Contradictory_uncertain" → "Contradictory"
- "Unverifiable_uncertain" → "Unverifiable"
- Strict setting: Maintains distinction between all five hallucination types listed above
# Clone the repository
git clone https://github.com/cl-tohoku/JHARS.git
cd JHARS
import pandas as pd
# Load and analyze JHARS dataset
df = pd.read_json('data/sentence_annotation/annotated_data_relaxed.jsonl', lines=True)
print(df.head())
This project is licensed under Apache License 2.0. See the LICENSE
file for details.
This work was supported through a research collaboration between AI Shift Inc. and Tohoku University.
- Research inquiries:
- ryohei.kamei.s4 at dc.tohoku.ac.jp
- sakata.masaki.s5 at dc.tohoku.ac.jp
- Bug reports & feature requests: GitHub Issues