OpenAI explains why AI models hallucinate and how to stop it

Why smart AI makes up answers

Have you ever asked a chatbot a simple question and it gave you a totally wrong but confident reply? That strange behavior is what experts call hallucination, and it is one of the biggest challenges for artificial intelligence today.

These mistakes happen because the systems are trained to guess rather than stay quiet when unsure. Just like a student filling in a multiple-choice exam without knowing the answer, chatbots often choose to bluff rather than admit they do not know.

The guessing game problem

When language models are tested, they earn points only when their answers are correct. Saying nothing at all usually gets them a zero. This creates an odd situation where guessing, even with low chances of being right, can improve scores.

Over time, the systems learn to favor risky answers over admitting uncertainty. That is why a chatbot might sound extremely sure of itself while giving you something that is not even close to true.

Why evaluations encourage mistakes

Most benchmarks that measure artificial intelligence look only at accuracy. This means they focus only on how many right answers a system gives. What these tests miss is that wrong answers can be much worse than staying silent.

By treating every response as either right or wrong, the scoring ignores humility and encourages a machine to gamble with answers. This explains why chatbots sometimes behave like star test takers, but not like reliable assistants.

A student like comparison

Researchers say it is like taking an exam in school. If you skip a question, you lose points, but if you take a wild guess, you might get lucky. Because of this setup, language models learn the same strategy students often use.

They answer everything, even when they are not sure. This helps them look better on paper, but it ends up creating a trust problem for people who rely on their answers.

Errors as classification slips

Behind the scenes, hallucinations can be understood as simple classification errors. The system tries to fit new information into categories, but sometimes it does not match correctly.

This is not a mysterious glitch. It is a statistical slip that happens because the system cannot perfectly separate facts from falsehoods. With millions of possibilities, even small errors can lead to confident but completely wrong statements that sound believable.

Birthdays and impossible facts

Imagine asking a computer to guess a pet’s birthday just by looking at photos. No matter how advanced the program is, it will very likely fail or have an extremely high error rate.

This is the same struggle language models face when dealing with rare or arbitrary facts. While they are great at patterns like grammar and spelling, they stumble badly when the answer is unpredictable or unique. That is why certain questions almost guarantee hallucinations.

How training creates illusions

Language models are built by predicting the next word in a sentence over billions of examples. This helps them sound fluent and natural in conversation.

During pretraining, models are overwhelmingly exposed to fluent (positive) text, with few explicit examples labeled as false or contradictory. As a result, they tend to learn to mimic smooth language rather than reliably distinguish truth from falsehood.

Accuracy can never reach perfect

Some assume hallucinations would disappear if models ever achieved 100% accuracy on benchmark tasks. Yet, in practice, open-world, out-of-distribution, or ambiguous queries remain, making hallucination risk persistent even as performance improves.

This means hallucinations will always be a risk unless systems learn to say they do not know when they really do not.

Small models can be humble

It might sound surprising, but smaller models can sometimes avoid hallucinations better than larger ones. The reason is that they know their limits.

If a tiny system has no knowledge of a language like Māori, it is more likely to say it cannot answer. A larger system with partial knowledge may try to guess instead, leading to confident errors. This shows that size alone does not guarantee reliability.

Different types of responses

When a model is asked a factual question, its response usually falls into three groups. It can be accurate, it can be wrong, or it can abstain by not guessing.

Errors are more harmful than abstentions, but current scoring treats them the same. This system rewards boldness over caution, which is why chatbots often lean toward filling in answers even when they should pause.

What leaderboard culture does

Most people see models ranked on leaderboards that highlight only accuracy. This creates public pressure for developers to improve that single number.

However, focusing solely on the right answers obscures the full story. Models that score higher on accuracy might actually be worse at avoiding errors. Until leaderboards change, companies have every incentive to build systems that guess rather than stay cautious.

Fixing the scoreboard rules

Researchers say the fix is simple. Wrong answers should be punished more heavily than honest uncertainty. This is similar to how some standardized exams use negative marking, or a user leaves a bad review to discourage blind guessing.

If evaluations gave partial credit for saying “I don’t know,” models would quickly learn that humility is safer than bluffing. Changing the rules could shift the entire industry toward more reliable systems.

A closer look at data patterns

Models handle different kinds of information with very different success rates. Clear patterns like grammar or punctuation are easy for them to master.

But low-frequency details, like the birthday of a person or a one-time historical fact, do not appear often enough to form patterns. When asked these kinds of questions, the model ends up fabricating answers because the data never gave it a reliable base to work from.

Why errors look so confident

One frustrating part of hallucinations is how convincing they sound. The machine does not hedge or hesitate; it delivers the answer with full confidence.

This is a byproduct of the way probabilities are converted into fluent text. The system is trained to speak smoothly, not to express doubt. So when it gets something wrong, the delivery style hides the uncertainty, making the mistake harder to spot.

Trust issues with false answers

Even though hallucinations may sound small, they cause real trust problems. People need to rely on accurate answers when using artificial intelligence tools.

When systems get basic facts wrong with full confidence, it erodes confidence in everything else they say. This is why experts see hallucinations as one of the most serious barriers to making these systems truly dependable in everyday life.

If you’ve ever wondered whether nonstop AI chatter wears people out, don’t miss how many mentions of ‘AI’ America can handle?

The road to fewer hallucinations

Researchers believe the path forward is not just building bigger models, but smarter evaluation systems. Rewarding honesty and discouraging risky guesses is key.

By reshaping how success is measured, developers can steer artificial intelligence toward reliability. While hallucinations may never fully vanish, making them rarer and easier to spot will help build trust between people and the technology they use every day.

Want to see how the rise of AI is creating unexpected jobs? Check out humans are now hired to clean up messy AI-generated content.

If you have ever noticed a chatbot making things up, share your experience in the comments. We would love to hear your story.

Read More From This Brand:

• AI in kindergarten? China just did it
• Stop using ChatGPT for these things before it gets you in trouble
• Woke artificial intelligence sparks new battle over online free speech

Don’t forget to follow us for more exclusive content right here on MSN.

If you like this story, you’ll LOVE our Free email newsletter. Join today and be the first to receive stories like these.

This slideshow was made with AI assistance and human editing.