A new tool has been developed to address the issue of hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) by breaking down their responses into atomic claims and retrieving evidence from a limited corpus. This tool compares the model's confidence with the actual support for its claims, flagging cases where there is high confidence but low evidence as epistemic risks rather than making "truth" judgments. The tool operates locally without the need for cloud services, accounts, or API keys, and is designed to be transparent about its limitations. An example of its application is the "Python 3.12 removed the GIL" case, where the tool identifies a high semantic similarity but low logical support, highlighting the potential for epistemic risk. This matters because it provides a method for critically evaluating the reliability of LLM outputs, helping to identify and mitigate the risks of misinformation.
