[thwarted]

Is it even possible to measure and distinguish the output as being hallucinated or not? All LLM output is hallucinated, it's only by statistics or chance that some of the output reflects facts, and we're only able to make that assessment because we can compare the output to facts. The model can't make that assessment itself.

Going from 50% "accurate" to 90% "accurate" may actually be more insidious because it changes the utility from being a coin flip to trying to determine which 10% is inaccurate, or downplaying the existence of inaccuracies because at 90% it is "mostly correct".