Solution

Use Search to Detect and Correct LLM Wrong Answers

LLMs hallucinate confidently, and without an external check, wrong answers reach users. Internal evaluation datasets go stale within weeks. User feedback is sparse -- most users wh

The Problem

LLMs hallucinate confidently, and without an external check, wrong answers reach users. Internal evaluation datasets go stale within weeks. User feedback is sparse -- most users who get a wrong answer leave silently. Teams need a real-time verification layer that does not depend on human review or static test sets.

The Scavio Solution

After the LLM generates an answer, extract its key claims and verify each one against a live Scavio search. If the search results contradict the claim, flag the answer for correction or add a caveat before sending it to the user. This creates an automated fact-checking loop that catches hallucinations in real time without requiring human reviewers.

Before

Before search-based verification, a customer-facing bot told a user that a software product cost $49/month when the actual price was $79/month. The user signed up expecting the lower price and filed a support ticket. The team discovered the error three days later during a manual review.

After

After adding search verification, the bot's price claim is checked against a live Google search for the product's pricing page. The $49 hallucination is flagged because search results show $79. The bot corrects itself before the user sees the wrong price. Pricing errors dropped to near zero.

Who It Is For

AI teams shipping customer-facing LLM products who need an automated fact-checking layer to catch hallucinations before they reach users.

Key Benefits

  • Real-time hallucination detection without human review
  • Catches pricing, date, and factual errors before they reach users
  • One API call per claim verification at $0.005
  • Works as a post-generation filter in any LLM pipeline
  • Search results provide citations for the correct answer

Python Example

Python
import requests, os, json

H = {'x-api-key': os.environ['SCAVIO_API_KEY']}

def verify_claim(claim: str, entity: str) -> dict:
    """Verify an LLM-generated claim against live search results."""
    r = requests.post('https://api.scavio.dev/api/v1/search', headers=H,
        json={'platform': 'google', 'query': f'{entity} {claim[:80]}'}, timeout=10).json()
    snippets = [o.get('snippet', '') for o in r.get('organic', [])[:3]]
    claim_lower = claim.lower()
    support_signals = sum(1 for s in snippets if any(
        term in s.lower() for term in claim_lower.split() if len(term) > 4))
    return {
        'claim': claim,
        'supported': support_signals >= 2,
        'evidence': snippets,
        'action': 'pass' if support_signals >= 2 else 'flag_for_review'
    }

result = verify_claim('Scavio costs $30 per month', 'Scavio search API pricing')
print(json.dumps(result, indent=2))

JavaScript Example

JavaScript
const H = { 'x-api-key': process.env.SCAVIO_API_KEY, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' };

async function verifyClaim(claim, entity) {
  const r = await fetch('https://api.scavio.dev/api/v1/search', {
    method: 'POST', headers: H,
    body: JSON.stringify({ platform: 'google', query: `${entity} ${claim.slice(0, 80)}` })
  }).then(r => r.json());
  const snippets = (r.organic || []).slice(0, 3).map(o => o.snippet || '');
  const terms = claim.toLowerCase().split(' ').filter(t => t.length > 4);
  const support = snippets.filter(s =>
    terms.some(t => s.toLowerCase().includes(t))).length;
  return { claim, supported: support >= 2, evidence: snippets,
    action: support >= 2 ? 'pass' : 'flag_for_review' };
}

Platforms Used

Google

Web search with knowledge graph, PAA, and AI overviews

Amazon

Product search with prices, ratings, and reviews

Frequently Asked Questions

LLMs hallucinate confidently, and without an external check, wrong answers reach users. Internal evaluation datasets go stale within weeks. User feedback is sparse -- most users who get a wrong answer leave silently. Teams need a real-time verification layer that does not depend on human review or static test sets.

After the LLM generates an answer, extract its key claims and verify each one against a live Scavio search. If the search results contradict the claim, flag the answer for correction or add a caveat before sending it to the user. This creates an automated fact-checking loop that catches hallucinations in real time without requiring human reviewers.

AI teams shipping customer-facing LLM products who need an automated fact-checking layer to catch hallucinations before they reach users.

Yes. Scavio's free tier includes 500 credits per month with no credit card required. That is enough to validate this solution in your workflow.

Use Search to Detect and Correct LLM Wrong Answers

After the LLM generates an answer, extract its key claims and verify each one against a live Scavio search. If the search results contradict the claim, flag the answer for correcti