本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

03-ref-hallucination-arena

Benchmark LLM reference recommendation capabilities by verifying every cited paper against Crossref, PubMed, arXiv, and DBLP. Measures hallucination rate, per-field accuracy (title/author/year/DOI), discipline breakdown, and year constraint compliance. Supports tool-augmented (ReAct + web search) mode. Use when the user asks to evaluate, benchmark, or compare models on academic reference hallucination, literature recommendation quality, or citation accuracy.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md9.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Reference Hallucination Arena Skill

Evaluate how accurately LLMs recommend real academic references using the OpenJudge RefArenaPipeline:

  1. Load queries — from JSON/JSONL dataset
  2. Collect responses — BibTeX-formatted references from target models
  3. Extract references — parse BibTeX entries from model output
  4. Verify references — cross-check against Crossref / PubMed / arXiv / DBLP
  5. Score & rank — compute verification rate, per-field accuracy, discipline breakdown
  6. Generate report — Markdown report + visualization charts

Prerequisites

# Install OpenJudge
pip install py-openjudge

# Extra dependency for ref_hallucination_arena (chart generation)
pip install matplotlib

Gather from user before running

InfoRequired?Notes
Config YAML pathYesDefines endpoints, dataset, verification settings
Dataset pathYesJSON/JSONL file with queries (can be set in config)
API keysYesEnv vars: OPENAI_API_KEY, DASHSCOPE_API_KEY, etc.
CrossRef emailNoImproves API rate limits for verification
PubMed API keyNoImproves PubMed rate limits
Output directoryNoDefault: ./evaluation_results/ref_hallucination_arena
Report languageNo"en" (default) or "zh"
Tavily API keyNoRequired only if using tool-augmented mode

Quick start

CLI

# Run evaluation with config file
python -m cookbooks.ref_hallucination_arena --config config.yaml --save

# Resume from checkpoint (default behavior)
python -m cookbooks.ref_hallucination_arena --config config.yaml --save

# Start fresh, ignore checkpoint
python -m cookbooks.ref_hallucination_arena --config config.yaml --fresh --save

# Override output directory
python -m cookbooks.ref_hallucination_arena --config config.yaml \
  --output_dir ./my_results --save

Python API

import asyncio
from cookbooks.ref_hallucination_arena.pipeline import RefArenaPipeline

async def main():
    pipeline = RefArenaPipeline.from_config("config.yaml")
    result = await pipeline.evaluate()

    for rank, (model, score) in enumerate(result.rankings, 1):
        print(f"{rank}. {model}: {score:.1%}")

asyncio.run(main())

CLI options

FlagDefaultDescription
--config—Path to YAML configuration file (required)
--output_dirconfig valueOverride output directory
--saveFalseSave results to file
--freshFalseStart fresh, ignore checkpoint

Minimal config file

task:
  description: "Evaluate LLM reference recommendation capabilities"

dataset:
  path: "./data/queries.json"

target_endpoints:
  model_a:
    base_url: "https://api.openai.com/v1"
    api_key: "${OPENAI_API_KEY}"
    model: "gpt-4"
    system_prompt: "You are an academic literature recommendation expert. Recommend {num_refs} real papers in BibTeX format. Only recommend papers you are confident actually exist."

  model_b:
    base_url: "https://dashscope.aliyuncs.com/compatible-mode/v1"
    api_key: "${DASHSCOPE_API_KEY}"
    model: "qwen3-max"
    system_prompt: "You are an academic literature recommendation expert. Recommend {num_refs} real papers in BibTeX format. Only recommend papers you are confident actually exist."

Full config reference

task

FieldRequiredDescription
descriptionYesEvaluation task description
scenarioNoUsage scenario

dataset

FieldDefaultDescription
path—Path to JSON/JSONL dataset file (required)
shufflefalseShuffle queries before evaluation
max_queriesnullMax queries to use (null = all)

target_endpoints.<name>

FieldDefaultDescription
base_url—API base URL (required)
api_key—API key, supports ${ENV_VAR} (required)
model—Model name (required)
system_promptbuilt-inSystem prompt; use {num_refs} placeholder
max_concurrency5Max concurrent requests for this endpoint
extra_params—Extra API request params (e.g. temperature)
tool_config.enabledfalseEnable ReAct agent with Tavily web search
tool_config.tavily_api_keyenv varTavily API key
tool_config.max_iterations10Max ReAct iterations (1–30)
tool_config.search_depth"advanced""basic" or "advanced"

verification

FieldDefaultDescription
crossref_mailto—Email for Crossref polite pool
pubmed_api_key—PubMed API key
max_workers10Concurrent verification threads (1–50)
timeout30Per-request timeout in seconds
verified_threshold0.7Min composite score to count as VERIFIED

evaluation

FieldDefaultDescription
timeout120Model API request timeout in seconds
retry_times3Number of retry attempts

output

FieldDefaultDescription
output_dir./evaluation_results/ref_hallucination_arenaOutput directory
save_queriestrueSave loaded queries
save_responsestrueSave model responses
save_detailstrueSave verification details

report

FieldDefaultDescription
enabledtrueEnable report generation
language"zh"Report language: "zh" or "en"
include_examples3Examples per section (1–10)
chart.enabledtrueGenerate charts
chart.orientation"vertical""horizontal" or "vertical"
chart.show_valuestrueShow values on bars
chart.highlight_besttrueHighlight best model

Dataset format

Each query in the JSON/JSONL dataset:

{
  "query": "Please recommend papers on Transformer architectures for NLP.",
  "discipline": "computer_science",
  "num_refs": 5,
  "language": "en",
  "year_constraint": {"min_year": 2020}
}
FieldRequiredDescription
queryYesPrompt for reference recommendation
disciplineNocomputer_science, biomedical, physics, chemistry, social_science, interdisciplinary, other
num_refsNoExpected number of references (default: 5)
languageNo"zh" or "en" (default: "zh")
year_constraintNo{"exact": 2023}, {"min_year": 2020}, {"max_year": 2015}, or {"min_year": 2020, "max_year": 2024}

Official dataset: OpenJudge/ref-hallucination-arena

Interpreting results

Overall accuracy (verification rate):

  • > 75% — Excellent: model rarely hallucinates references
  • 60–75% — Good: most references are real, some fabrication
  • 40–60% — Fair: significant hallucination, use with caution
  • < 40% — Poor: model frequently fabricates references

Per-field accuracy:

  • title_accuracy — % of titles matching real papers
  • author_accuracy — % of correct author lists
  • year_accuracy — % of correct publication years
  • doi_accuracy — % of valid DOIs

Verification status:

  • VERIFIED — title + author + year all exactly match a real paper
  • SUSPECT — partial match (e.g. title matches but authors differ)
  • NOT_FOUND — no match in any database
  • ERROR — API timeout or network failure

Ranking order: overall accuracy → year compliance rate → avg confidence → completeness

Output files

evaluation_results/ref_hallucination_arena/
├── evaluation_report.md          # Detailed Markdown report
├── evaluation_results.json       # Rankings, per-field accuracy, scores
├── verification_chart.png        # Per-field accuracy bar chart
├── discipline_chart.png          # Per-discipline accuracy chart
├── queries.json                  # Loaded evaluation queries
├── responses.json                # Raw model responses
├── extracted_refs.json           # Extracted BibTeX references
├── verification_results.json     # Per-reference verification details
└── checkpoint.json               # Pipeline checkpoint for resume

API key by model

Model prefixEnvironment variable
gpt-*, o1-*, o3-*OPENAI_API_KEY
claude-*ANTHROPIC_API_KEY
qwen-*, dashscope/*DASHSCOPE_API_KEY
deepseek-*DEEPSEEK_API_KEY
Custom endpointset api_key + base_url in config

Additional resources

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when the user wants help with academic papers or citations but it's unclear which specific workflow fits — reviewing a paper, checking a BibTeX file for fake references, or benchmarking multiple LLMs on reference-recommendation accuracy. Also use when the user mentions paper review, peer review, BibTeX verification, citation checking, reference hallucination, or academic literature accuracy and hasn't specified which of those three tasks they mean. This skill is the entry router for the academic-eval suite: it asks one diagnostic question then routes to the right sub-skill.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

agentscope-ai/OpenJudge8732026年9月11日 更新

Use when the user wants to compare or benchmark multiple LLMs/agents arena-style but it's unclear which specific workflow fits — a general-purpose win-rate comparison on a custom task, or a benchmark specifically about reference/citation hallucination rate. Also use when the user mentions model arena, agent arena, pairwise model comparison, win-rate ranking, or comparing models on a task and hasn't specified whether that task is generic or about citation accuracy. This skill is the entry router for the arena-eval suite: it asks one diagnostic question when needed, then recommends the workflow or workflows needed to cover the request.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

agentscope-ai/OpenJudge8732026年9月11日 更新

Automatically evaluate and compare multiple AI models or agents without pre-existing test data. Generates test queries from a task description, collects responses from all target endpoints, auto-generates evaluation rubrics, runs pairwise comparisons via a judge model, and produces win-rate rankings with reports and charts. Supports checkpoint resume, incremental endpoint addition, and judge model hot-swap. Use when the user asks to compare, benchmark, or rank multiple models or agents on a custom task, or run an arena-style evaluation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

agentscope-ai/OpenJudge8732026年9月11日 更新

Build custom LLM evaluation pipelines using the OpenJudge framework. Covers selecting and configuring graders (LLM-based, function-based, agentic), running batch evaluations with GradingRunner, combining scores with aggregators, applying evaluation strategies (voting, average), auto-generating graders from data, and analyzing results (pairwise win rates, statistics, validation metrics). Use when the user wants to evaluate LLM outputs, compare multiple models, design scoring criteria, or build an automated evaluation system.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

agentscope-ai/OpenJudge8732026年9月11日 更新

Review academic papers for correctness, quality, and novelty using OpenJudge's multi-stage pipeline. Supports PDF files and LaTeX source packages (.tar.gz/.zip). Covers 10 disciplines: cs, medicine, physics, chemistry, biology, economics, psychology, environmental_science, mathematics, social_sciences. Use when the user asks to review, evaluate, critique, or assess a research paper, check references, or verify a BibTeX file.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

agentscope-ai/OpenJudge8732026年9月11日 更新

Verify a BibTeX file for hallucinated or fabricated references by cross-checking every entry against CrossRef, arXiv, and DBLP. Reports each reference as verified, suspect, or not found, with field-level mismatch details (title, authors, year, DOI). Use when the user wants to check a .bib file for fake citations, validate references in a paper, or audit bibliography entries for accuracy.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

agentscope-ai/OpenJudge8732026年9月11日 更新

agentscope-ai のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する