RU22Fact: Optimizing Evidence for Multilingual Explainable Fact-Checking on Russia-Ukraine Conflict (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods to verify factuality of claims do not provide sufficient evidence for explainable fact-checking systems. |
| Approach: | They propose a method to automatically retrieve and summarize evidence from the Web and a novel multilingual explainable fact-checking dataset on the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method can retrieve and summarize evidence from the Web and generate explanations in 16 languages. |
Similar Papers
Automated Fact-Checking of Claims from Wikipedia (2020.lrec-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Fact checking datasets such as FEVER and SNLI suffer from limited applicability due to synthetic nature of claims and/or evidence written by annotators that differ from real claims and evidence on the internet. |
| Approach: | They present a dataset of 124k+ triples consisting of a claim, context and an evidence document extracted from English Wikipedia articles and citations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset is the largest fact checking dataset consisting of real claims and evidence to date. |
Fact or Fiction: Verifying Scientific Claims (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
David Wadden, Shanchuan Lin, Kyle Lo, Lucy Lu Wang, Madeleine van Zuylen, Arman Cohan, Hannaneh Hajishirzi
| Challenge: | SciFact is a dataset of 1.4K expert-written scientific claims paired with evidence-containing abstracts annotated with labels and rationales. |
| Approach: | They construct a dataset of 1.4K scientific claims paired with evidence-containing abstracts annotated with labels and rationales to test their system. |
| Outcome: | The proposed system can verify claims related to COVID-19 by identifying evidence from the CORD-19 corpus. |
Explainable Automated Fact-Checking: A Survey (2020.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Steady progress has been made in fact-checking and its orthogonal tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to use fact-checking explanations to explain predictions by comparing existing explanations against desirable properties to find out what makes for good explanations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed explanations are compared against desirable properties and show how they may lead to improvements in the research area. |
Explainable Automated Fact-Checking for Public Health Claims (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a few blind spots exist in the state-of-the-art in fact-checking for political claims. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a dataset of 11.8K claims to explain fact-check labels for claims . they define and evaluate three coherence properties of explanation quality with humans . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can be trained on in-domain data and evaluates its coherence properties with humans and computationally. |
MultiFC: A Real-World Multi-Domain Dataset for Evidence-Based Fact Checking of Claims (D19-1)
Copied to clipboard
Isabelle Augenstein, Christina Lioma, Dongsheng Wang, Lucas Chaves Lima, Casper Hansen, Christian Hansen, Jakob Grue Simonsen
| Challenge: | Existing efforts to verify factual claims are limited by small datasets or artificially constructed datasets. |
| Approach: | They propose to use the largest publicly available dataset of naturally occurring factual claims for automatic claim verification. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms baseline models and evidence pages significantly. |
DialFact: A Benchmark for Fact-Checking in Dialogue (2022.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing fact-checking models trained on non-dialogue data fail to perform well on this task. |
| Approach: | They propose a task of fact-checking in dialogue to improve fact- checking performance . they propose to use an annotated conversational claim and Wikipedia snippets as evidence . |
| Outcome: | The proposed task improves fact-checking performance in dialogue. |
Automated Fact Checking: Task Formulations, Methods and Future Directions (C18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent research on fact checking has focused on misinformation . however, relevant papers and articles have been published in research communities that are unaware of each other and use inconsistent terminology. |
| Approach: | They propose avenues for future NLP research on automated fact checking . they highlight the use of evidence as an important distinguishing factor . |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods unify the task formulations and methodologies across papers and authors. |
Explaining Sources of Uncertainty in Automated Fact-Checking (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods to explain model uncertainty as numbers or hedges do not reveal which evidence conflicts cause the uncertainty, leaving users unable to resolve disagreements. |
| Approach: | They propose a plug-and-play framework that generates natural-language explanations of model uncertainty grounded in conflicting/agreeing evidence. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework generates explanations that more faithfully track model uncertainty and better align with the model’s fact-checking decisions than span-agnostic explanation prompting. |
TrendFact: A Benchmark Towards Hotspot Perception in Automatic Fact-Checking (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Xiaocheng Zhang, Xi Wang, Yifei Lu, Jianing Wang, Zhuangzhuang Ye, Mengjiao Bao, Peng Yan, Xiaohong Su
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks lack social metadata and evaluation framework to meet this urgent evaluation needs. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark capable of evaluating HPA and three fact-checking tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves HPA and computational efficiency for RLM-driven systems. |
Automated Justification Production for Claim Veracity in Fact Checking: A Survey on Architectures and Approaches (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Current research focuses on predicting claim veracity through metadata analysis and language scrutiny, with an emphasis on justifying verdicts. |
| Approach: | They propose a comprehensive taxonomy for categorizing works based on various criteria and propose scalable methodologies for improving fact-checking explainability. |
| Outcome: | The proposed taxonomy identifies challenges while proposing future directions in fact-checking explainability. |