“There is still no robust solution to hallucinations.”
Our reading, the sentence that was checked:
There is still no robust solution to LLM hallucinations.
Assessment: Supported Evidence as of
Where and when Gary Marcus wrote it
Marcus on AI, 25 AI Predictions for 2025, from Marcus on AI, paragraph 4.
- Said
- Source observed
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence as of
- the cutoff for this assessment
- Assessment recorded
- assessment marcus-25-ai-predictions-for-2025-from-marcus-597446-a3
We recorded 37 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.
The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-28. The source may have been edited after 2025-01-01. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.
What the claim commits to
- Kind
- Observation
- Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
- None stated. This site does not add one.
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Deadline state on 2026-10-29
- No horizon (the release’s reference date)
From the speaker
- still
- no robust solution
- hallucinations
Our interpretation
- Plain reading: as of the end of 2024, no available method reliably stopped LLMs from producing confident false statements across ordinary tasks.
- He states a current condition without a period. Since the post reviews 2024, the target period is calendar 2024 up to the post date.
Counts as supported if: Evidence from late 2024 shows leading LLMs still hallucinate at meaningful rates, or that leading labs still treat hallucination as unsolved.
Counts as contradicted if: Evidence shows a method or model that, by the end of 2024, reliably removed hallucinations across varied tasks in independent tests.
Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.
Current assessment
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Supported
The dated evidence matches what the claim committed to, under the criteria frozen before grading.
Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.
- Evidence as of
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Assessment recorded
- Policy version
- 2026-10-28.7
Rationale
The claim describes conditions in 2024, up to the post date of 1 January 2025. On 7 November 2024, OpenAI researchers wrote that current frontier models sometimes produce false outputs, known as hallucinations. They also called training models to give factually correct answers an open problem (e1). The same paper introduced SimpleQA, a set of short fact-seeking questions, and said GPT-4o and Claude both scored under 50% on it (e2). None of the cited evidence shows a method that reliably removed hallucinations across varied tasks by the end of 2024. Under the contract, a lab saying in late 2024 that hallucination was unsolved counts as support, so the claim holds on a plain reading.
Limitations
- The main source is a lab paper describing its own models' limits. Independent leaderboard figures for late 2024 could not be read.
- A SimpleQA score under 50% is not the same as a hallucination rate, because the benchmark also counts questions the model did not attempt.
- The evidence does not measure hallucination rates in grounded settings such as retrieval or summarization.
- 'Robust' has no set threshold.
Evidence (2 items)
Supports the claim: OpenAI (arXiv 2411.04368),
Current frontier models sometimes produce false outputs or answers that are not substantiated by evidence, a problem known as “hallucinations.”
Why it matters here: OpenAI researchers said in November 2024 that frontier models still hallucinate, and the paper calls factual accuracy an open problem.
- Publisher
- OpenAI (arXiv 2411.04368)
- Kind of source
- Preprint, not peer reviewed
- Describes events of
- Public from
Supports the claim: OpenAI (arXiv 2411.04368),
SimpleQA is created to be challenging for frontier models (e.g., GPT-4o and Claude both score less than 50%).
Why it matters here: Leading models answered fewer than half of simple fact questions correctly at the end of 2024. That does not look like a robust fix for false answers.
- Publisher
- OpenAI (arXiv 2411.04368)
- Kind of source
- Preprint, not peer reviewed
- Describes events of
- Public from
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the sources this register covers.
: Marcus on AI, 25 AI Predictions for 2025, from Marcus on AI
There is still no robust solution to hallucinations.
- Where
- paragraph 4
- Published
- 2025-01-01
- Source observed
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Assessment versions
- Assessment marcus-25-ai-predictions-for-2025-from-marcus-597446-a3: Current. Outcome: Supported. Evidence as of 2026-10-28. Public date not recorded.
Recorded events
Assessment publishedBy this site
First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.
About assessment marcus-25-ai-predictions-for-2025-from-marcus-597446-a3.