Merging Facts, Crafting Fallacies: Evaluating the Contradictory Nature of Aggregated Factual Claims in Long-Form Generations

Long-form generations from large language models (LLMs) contains a mix of factual and non-factual claims, making evaluating factuality difficult. To evaluate factual precision of long-form generations in a more fine-grained way, prior works propose to decompose long-form generations into multiple verifiable facts and verify those facts independently. The factuality of the generation is the proportion of verifiable facts among all the facts. Such methods assume that combining factual claims forms a factual paragraph. This paper shows that the assumption can be violated due to entity ambiguity. We show that LLMs can generate paragraphs that contain verifiable facts, but the facts are combined to form a non-factual paragraph due to entity ambiguity. We further reveal that existing factual precision metrics, including FActScore and citation recall, cannot properly evaluate the factuality of these non-factual paragraphs. To address this, we introduce an enhanced metric, D-FActScore, specifically designed for content with ambiguous entities. We evaluate the D-FActScores of people biographies generated with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). We show that D-FActScore can better assess the factuality of paragraphs with entity ambiguity than FActScore. We also find that four widely used open-source LLMs tend to mix information of distinct entities to form non-factual paragraphs.