Mitigating Hallucination on Hallucination in RAG via Ensemble Voting
Zequn Xie, Zhengyang Sun
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) aims to reduce hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs) by integrating external knowledge. However, RAG introduces a critical challenge: hallucination on hallucination," where flawed retrieval results mislead the generation model, leading to compounded hallucinations. To address this issue, we propose VOTE-RAG, a novel, training-free framework with a two-stage structure and ...
efficient, parallelizable voting mechanisms. VOTE-RAG includes: (1) Retrieval Voting, where multiple agents generate diverse queries in parallel and aggregate all retrieved documents; (2) Response Voting, where multiple agents independently generate answers based on the aggregated documents, with the final output determined by majority vote. We conduct comparative experiments on six benchmark datasets. Our results show that VOTE-RAG achieves performance comparable to or surpassing more complex frameworks. Additionally, VOTE-RAG features a simpler architecture, is fully parallelizable, and avoids the problem drift" risk. Our work demonstrates that simple, reliable ensemble voting is a superior and more efficient method for mitigating RAG hallucinations.
Results & Benchmarks
Benchmark evidence drill-down
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retrieval / indexing | Naive RAG | 2Wiki | 69.55 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) aims to reduce hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs) by integrating external knowledge.
Implementation Evidence Summary
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Reproduction Risks
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence disclosure
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Implementation Status
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Reproduction readiness
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
No verified implementation available
- · No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Research context
Tasks
Retrieval / indexing
Methods
Transformer, Retrieval-augmented generation
Domains
Natural Language Processing, Information Retrieval
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.