# FinReflectKG -- HalluBench: GraphRAG Hallucination Benchmark for Financial Question Answering Systems

Source: [FinReflectKG -- HalluBench: GraphRAG Hallucination Benchmark for Financial Question Answering Systems](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/69c21a860636e5bf4afc47d8>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2026-03-25T05:00:04.214Z

Authors: Mahesh Kumar, Bhaskarjit Sarmah, Stefano Pasquali

Published: 2026-03-11T04:37:53.000Z

## Abstract

As organizations increasingly integrate AI-powered question-answering systems into financial information systems for compliance, risk assessment, and decision support, ensuring the factual accuracy of AI-generated outputs becomes a critical engineering challenge. Current Knowledge Graph (KG)-augmented QA systems lack systematic mechanisms to detect hallucinations - factually incorrect outputs that undermine reliability and user trust. We introduce FinBench-QA-Hallucination, a benchmark for evaluating hallucination detection methods in KG-augmented financial QA over SEC 10-K filings. The dataset contains 755 annotated examples from 300 pages, each labeled for groundedness using a conservative evidence-linkage protocol requiring support from both textual chunks and extracted relational triplets. We evaluate six detection approaches - LLM judges, fine-tuned classifiers, Natural Language Inference (NLI) models, span detectors, and embedding-based methods under two conditions: with and without KG triplets. Results show that LLM-based judges and embedding approaches achieve the highest performance (F1: 0.82-0.86) under clean conditions. However, most methods degrade significantly when noisy triplets are introduced, with Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) dropping 44-84 percent, while embedding methods remain relatively robust with only 9 percent degradation. Statistical tests (Cochran's Q and McNemar) confirm significant performance differences (p \< 0.001). Our findings highlight vulnerabilities in current KG-augmented systems and provide insights for building reliable financial information systems, where hallucinations can lead to regulatory violations and flawed decisions. The benchmark also offers a framework for integrating AI reliability evaluation into information system design across other high-stakes domains such as healthcare, legal, and government.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20252>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.20252.pdf>)
