Reduce AI Hallucinations with Grounding — the Strict Contract
The strongest anti-hallucination tool is structural: only the delimited source exists, gaps answer "The source does not say.", and uncited claims are forbidden.
Overview
Hallucination on source-based tasks is mostly permission: the model fills gaps because nothing forbade it. Strict grounding removes the permission structurally — only the material between the delimiters exists for the task; assumptions are forbidden; anything missing gets the exact answer "The source does not say." and speculation stops there; and every claim must cite its [§N] marker, with the closing rule that a claim you cannot cite is a claim you cannot make. "This cannot be answered from the source" is defined as a valid, complete answer. This setup loads contract clauses — where invented terms are the most expensive hallucination there is.
Workflow
-
Remove the permission
Outside knowledge is not reduced — it is forbidden, in writing, for this task.
-
Fix the gap answer
"The source does not say." — exact wording, then stop; speculation has nowhere to start.
-
Demand the citation
No §N, no claim — hallucinations fail the citation test before they reach you.
Why This Works
- Structural prohibition beats politeness-level "please don't guess"
- A fixed gap answer makes honesty the path of least resistance
- The citation gate filters inventions mechanically
Best for
- Contracts, policies, and compliance documents
- High-stakes source-bound questioning
- Teams burned by confident inventions
Not for
- Creative or knowledge-blending tasks — strict grounding deliberately forbids them
- Validating an AI output's format — the AI Output Validator
Use cases
- Q&A where invented answers are costly
- Making "the source does not say" an acceptable answer
- Forcing citations on every claim