Part III · Journeyman
Chapter 11
Why it makes things up
We asked a real model about a book that does not exist, a World Cup in the future and a sum. It answered all three with confidence. Here is the reason, and what a model cannot do.
On this page
In this chapter, we will learn where a language model goes wrong, and why. We will ask a real model six kinds of question that it cannot answer reliably, and read what it says. Each mistake follows from something we learned in the earlier chapters, so we will be able to name its cause.
Fluent is not the same as true
A language model produces the most likely continuation of a text. Whether the continuation is true plays no part in the calculation.
Look back at what the machine does. It turns text into numbers, multiplies them by its weights, and ends with a chance for every token (Chapter 7). At no station on that way is there a step that checks a fact. There is no list of facts that could be checked against.
We can watch this in GPT-2 small. We gave it the beginnings of eight sentences that have one true ending. Each line shows the token we wanted, the chance the model gave it and its place in the model's list. The three best guesses follow, with their chances in percent. All are measured.
The capital of France is | wanted ' Paris' 3.2% rank 5 | top [(' the', 8.5), (' now', 4.8), (' a', 4.6)]
The capital of Australia is | wanted ' Canberra' 0.8% rank 17 | top [(' the', 9.0), (' a', 5.2), (' home', 4.2)]
Two plus two equals | wanted ' four' 5.4% rank 4 | top [(' one', 33.0), (' two', 10.8), (' three', 6.8)]
The opposite of hot is | wanted ' cold' 16.3% rank 1 | top [(' cold', 16.3), (' the', 8.2), (' a', 6.2)]
The largest planet in our solar system is | wanted ' Jupiter' 2.7% rank 5 | top [(' about', 9.4), (' the', 6.2), (' a', 5.8)]
The first person to walk on the moon was | wanted ' Neil' 2.9% rank 3 | top [(' a', 5.9), (' the', 3.6), (' Neil', 2.9)]
The Eiffel Tower is in the city of | wanted ' Paris' 7.0% rank 1 | top [(' Paris', 7.0), (' London', 5.8), (' New', 3.1)]
Once upon a | wanted ' time' 17.7% rank 1 | top [(' time', 17.7), (' certain', 8.5), (' moment', 3.1)]
sentences 8 the true ending is the model's first guess 3 cold, Paris (Eiffel Tower), time the true ending is further down 5
Pick a sentence and look at the bars. Guess first: for "Two plus two equals", which number does the model think most likely?
"Two plus two equals one" is false. It is also a possible English sentence, and every bar in the interactive is a way in which an English sentence could go on. The model was trained to be good at exactly that.
Let us be fair to the model. A guess such as "the" is not false in itself, because "The capital of France is the city of Paris" is a true sentence. The experiment does not show eight errors. It shows that the order of the bars is an order of likelihood, in which truth has no say.
The word for a fluent answer that is false is hallucination. It is a misleading word, because it suggests that the model does something unusual when it happens. It does not. A true answer and an invented one are produced by the same steps. The model cannot feel the difference.
Six kinds of question to a larger model
Each of the six mistakes below has a cause that we can name. GPT-2 small is from 2019. We asked a newer and larger open model, Qwen2.5 with 1.5 billion weights, trained to be an assistant. It is still small by today's measure, so its mistakes are easy to provoke. Large models make the same kinds of mistake, less often.
1. A book that does not exist
asked "In two sentences, summarise the novel 'The Silent Orchard of Kepler' by Maya Lindqvist."
answered '"The Silent Orchard of Kepler" by Maya Lindqvist is a novel that explores themes of nature, loss, and the human connection to the environment. The story revolves around a young girl who discovers a hidden orchard in the forest, where she finds a magical tree that speaks to her. As she learns to care for the orchard and its inhabitants, she discovers the importance of preserving nature and the value of human connection. The novel emphasizes the beauty'
We invented the title and the author. The model wrote a summary with themes, a main character and a talking tree. Cause: the most likely continuation of "summarise the novel X" is a summary. "I have never heard of this book" is a much rarer continuation in the text the model learned from. The word "orchard" in the title was enough to supply the trees.
2. An event in the future
asked 'Who won the football World Cup in 2038? Answer in one sentence.'
answered "I'm sorry, but the World Cup is an annual event, so it's impossible to predict the winner of the World Cup in 2038. The World Cup is held every four years, so the next World Cup will be in 2022."
The model rightly declines to name a winner. But it calls the World Cup an annual event, says in the next sentence that it is held every four years, and names 2022 as the next one. Cause: each sentence, taken alone, is a likely one. The model does read its earlier sentences while it writes, which makes agreement with them likely. No step makes it certain, and in a small model it fails often. The year 2022 is probably there because much of the text the model learned from was written before that tournament, when 2022 really was the next one.
3. Today's date
asked "What is today's date? Reply with the date only."
answered '2023-11-26'
We asked on 28 September 2026. Cause: the model has no clock. Its weights were frozen when training ended, and everything it knows is from text written before a certain day. That day is called the knowledge cutoff. For the model it is always about that day. The date it wrote is a likely date and no more. It need not be the exact day of the cutoff.
4. Arithmetic
asked 'What is 4837 x 9216? Reply with the number only.'
answered '441004192'
correct 44,577,792
the model's answer 441,004,192 the correct answer 44,577,792 too large by a factor 441,004,192 / 44,577,792 = about 9.9
The answer begins with 44, as the correct one does, and it has one digit too many. Cause: the model does not calculate. It writes the digits of a number that looks like the result of such a multiplication. We saw in Chapter 4 that a tokenizer cuts a long number into pieces. The model guesses one piece after another, from left to right. A person who multiplies on paper starts at the right and carries.
5. Letters inside a word
asked 'How many times does the letter r appear in the word strawberry? Reply with the number only.'
answered '3'
correct 3
asked 'How many times does the letter e appear in the word nevertheless? Reply with the number only.'
answered '3'
correct 4
asked 'How many times does the letter e appear in the word bookkeeper? Reply with the number only.'
answered '4'
correct 3
One right out of three (the lines marked "correct" were counted by our program). We print the right one too, because it teaches something: a correct answer does not prove that the model can do the task. Cause: the model never sees letters. It sees the numbers of tokens, and "strawberry" may be a single one. The question about strawberry is famous and has been written about often, so the right answer may be the familiar one and no more.
6. A private fact
asked "What is the name of Maya's cat? Reply with the name only."
answered 'Whisker'
Maya's cat is called Miso. Cause: the model has never heard of Maya. We asked for a name only, so it gave one, the kind of name a cat would have. This is the most important case for anyone who builds an application. What is not in the weights and not in the prompt does not exist for the model. It will fill the gap with something likely.
The causes, side by side
| What went wrong | The cause | Chapter | The repair |
|---|---|---|---|
| Invented a book | continues in the likely way; no step checks facts | 1, 7 | give it the source, and allow it to say "I do not know" |
| Contradicted itself | each token is guessed from the text so far; nothing checks the whole | 1 | ask it to check its answer, or use a larger model |
| Wrong date, old news | frozen weights, knowledge cutoff | 8 | put the date and the news into the prompt |
| Wrong sum | guesses digits, does not calculate | 4 | give it a calculator |
| Cannot count letters | sees tokens, not letters | 4 | give it a tool, or spell the word out with spaces |
| Invented a private fact | the fact is neither in the weights nor in the prompt | 9 | put the fact into the prompt |
Every repair in the last column has the same form: give the model what it lacks. That is the subject of the next chapter, where we repair three of these six answers: the private fact, the date and the sum.
What the model inherits from its text
A model repeats the patterns of the text it was trained on, including the patterns we would rather it did not have. If doctors are mostly "he" and nurses mostly "she" in the training text, the model will lean the same way when it writes a story. If most of the text is English and about rich countries, the model knows those best. This is called bias. It is a different thing from the bias of Chapter 2, the number added to a sum; the two only share a word. The makers work against it in fine-tuning, the second phase of training that we met in Chapter 8, and they have not removed it.
What a language model is good at
A language model is strongest when the material it needs is in the prompt. This chapter may leave the wrong impression, so let us set it right. The same mechanism that invents a book does a great deal very well.
| Good at, because it is a matter of language | Weak at, without help |
|---|---|
| rewriting, shortening and translating a text it is given | exact arithmetic |
| answering questions about a text that is in the prompt | facts that are rare, recent or private |
| writing and explaining program code | counting letters, words or items |
| sorting texts into classes, pulling out names and dates | knowing what it does not know |
| explaining well known subjects | giving the true source of a statement |
The left column has one thing in common. In each case the material is in front of the model, or the subject was covered thousands of times in its training text. The model is at its best as a worker on text that you hand to it. It is at its worst as an oracle that is asked for facts from memory.
Try it yourself
Invent a book. Give it a believable title and an author who does not exist. Ask an assistant of your choice to summarise it in two sentences.
A good assistant of today will often say that it does not know the book. Then make it harder: ask about the third chapter of a real but little known book, or for the name of the mayor of a small town in 1970. Note at which point the answers become confident and wrong.
The program behind this chapter is 05_wrong_and_fixed.py. It runs against the same local
server as the program of Chapter 9.
python 05_wrong_and_fixed.py
Common questions
Will larger models stop making things up?
They do it less. Larger models know more, and they have been trained to say "I do not know" more often. But the mechanism is the same, so the mistake cannot be ruled out. Wherever the facts must be right, the answer should rest on a source that is given to the model. A person or a program should be able to check it.
Can the model tell me how sure it is?
It can write a number, as we saw with "confidence: 95" in Chapter 9. That number is text like any other. The chances of the tokens are a better signal, and some services return them on request. Even those measure how usual a continuation is, which is not the same as whether it is true.
Why does it invent sources and links?
Because a reference has a very regular form: authors, a year, a title, a journal. The model can write something of that form with ease, in the same way as it wrote the summary of our invented book. Open every link before you rely on it.
Does a model that searches the web still make mistakes?
Fewer, and of a different kind. With search, the pages found are put into the prompt, so the facts are in front of the model. It can still misread a page, mix up two pages, or trust a page that is wrong.
Is a hallucination the same as a lie?
No. A lie needs someone who knows the truth and says something else. The model has no separate knowledge of the truth against which its sentence could be measured. It produced a likely sentence, as always.
Why does it agree with me when I say it is wrong?
Because in conversations between people, "you are wrong" is often followed by "you are right, I am sorry". The model continues in the likely way. It will often give in even when its first answer was correct, so its agreement is no evidence that you were right.
Carry this
- The model produces the likely continuation. No step checks whether it is true.
- A true answer and an invented one are made by the same steps. The model cannot feel the difference.
- Four causes: no fact checking, frozen weights with a knowledge cutoff, tokens in place of letters and digits, and facts that are in neither the weights nor the prompt.
- What is not in the weights and not in the prompt does not exist for the model.
- The model is best as a worker on text you hand to it, and worst as an oracle.
Check yourself
1. A model says that a law was changed "last month". Its knowledge cutoff is 18 months ago. What can you conclude?
Answer
That "last month" means the month before the cutoff at best, and may be invented altogether. The model cannot know what happened in the last 18 months unless the information was put into the prompt. Check the law at its source.
2. In our test the model counted the letters of "strawberry" correctly. Does that show that it can count letters?
Answer
No. It was wrong on the two other words. One correct answer can come from a familiar question. To find out whether a model can do a task, test it on many cases, including ones it is unlikely to have seen.
3. Name the cause of this mistake: an assistant for a bank tells a customer the wrong opening hours of a branch.
Answer
The opening hours of one branch are a rare and changing fact. They are not reliably in the weights, and they were not in the prompt. The model filled the gap with likely hours. The repair is to look the hours up and put them into the prompt.