HELPD: Mitigating Hallucination of LVLMs by Hierarchical Feedback Learning with Vision-enhanced Penalty Decoding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have shown remarkable performance on many visual-language tasks. However, these models still suffer from \emph{multimodal hallucination}, which means the generation of objects or content that violates the images. Many existing work detects hallucination by directly judging whether an object exists in an image, overlooking the association between the object and semantics. To address this issue, we propose Hierarchical Feedback Learning with Vision-enhanced Penalty Decoding (HELPD). This framework incorporates hallucination feedback at both object and sentence semantic levels. Remarkably, even with a marginal degree of training, this approach can alleviate over 15% of hallucination. Simultaneously, HELPD penalizes the output logits according to the image attention window to avoid being overly affected by generated text. HELPD can be seamlessly integrated with any LVLMs. Our experiments demonstrate that the proposed framework yields favorable results across multiple hallucination benchmarks. It effectively mitigates hallucination for different LVLMs and concurrently improves their text generation quality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".