Assisting the Human Fact-Checkers: Detecting All Previously Fact-Checked Claims in a Document

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.07410v1
• Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:46:52 GMT
• Title: Assisting the Human Fact-Checkers: Detecting All Previously Fact-Checked Claims in a Document
• Authors: Shaden Shaar, Firoj Alam, Giovanni Da San Martino, Preslav Nakov
• Abstract summary: Given an input document, it aims to detect all sentences that contain a claim that can be verified by some previously fact-checked claims. The output is a re-ranked list of the document sentences, so that those that can be verified are ranked as high as possible. Our analysis demonstrates the importance of modeling text similarity and stance, while also taking into account the veracity of the retrieved previously fact-checked claims.
• Score: 27.076320857009655
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Given the recent proliferation of false claims online, there has been a lot of manual fact-checking effort. As this is very time-consuming, human fact-checkers can benefit from tools that can support them and make them more efficient. Here, we focus on building a system that could provide such support. Given an input document, it aims to detect all sentences that contain a claim that can be verified by some previously fact-checked claims (from a given database). The output is a re-ranked list of the document sentences, so that those that can be verified are ranked as high as possible, together with corresponding evidence. Unlike previous work, which has looked into claim retrieval, here we take a document-level perspective. We create a new manually annotated dataset for the task, and we propose suitable evaluation measures. We further experiment with a learning-to-rank approach, achieving sizable performance gains over several strong baselines. Our analysis demonstrates the importance of modeling text similarity and stance, while also taking into account the veracity of the retrieved previously fact-checked claims. We believe that this research would be of interest to fact-checkers, journalists, media, and regulatory authorities.

Related papers

• Give Me More Details: Improving Fact-Checking with Latent Retrieval [58.706972228039604]
  Evidence plays a crucial role in automated fact-checking. Existing fact-checking systems either assume the evidence sentences are given or use the search snippets returned by the search engine. We propose to incorporate full text from source documents as evidence and introduce two enriched datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-25T15:01:19Z)
• Complex Claim Verification with Evidence Retrieved in the Wild [73.19998942259073]
  We present the first fully automated pipeline to check real-world claims by retrieving raw evidence from the web. Our pipeline includes five components: claim decomposition, raw document retrieval, fine-grained evidence retrieval, claim-focused summarization, and veracity judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T17:49:19Z)
• Read it Twice: Towards Faithfully Interpretable Fact Verification by Revisiting Evidence [59.81749318292707]
  We propose a fact verification model named ReRead to retrieve evidence and verify claim. The proposed system is able to achieve significant improvements upon best-reported models under different settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-02T03:23:14Z)
• GERE: Generative Evidence Retrieval for Fact Verification [57.78768817972026]
  We propose GERE, the first system that retrieves evidences in a generative fashion. The experimental results on the FEVER dataset show that GERE achieves significant improvements over the state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-12T03:49:35Z)
• Assessing Effectiveness of Using Internal Signals for Check-Worthy Claim Identification in Unlabeled Data for Automated Fact-Checking [6.193231258199234]
  This paper explores methodology to identify check-worthy claim sentences from fake news articles. We leverage two internal supervisory signals - headline and the abstractive summary - to rank the sentences. We show that while the headline has more gisting similarity with how a fact-checking website writes a claim, the summary-based pipeline is the most promising for an end-to-end fact-checking system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-02T16:17:20Z)
• Weakly- and Semi-supervised Evidence Extraction [107.47661281843232]
  We propose new methods to combine few evidence annotations with abundant document-level labels for the task of evidence extraction. Our approach yields substantial gains with as few as hundred evidence annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-03T04:05:00Z)
• Generating Fact Checking Summaries for Web Claims [8.980876474818153]
  We present a neural attention-based approach that learns to establish the correctness of textual claims based on evidence in the form of text documents. We show the efficacy of our approach on datasets concerning political, healthcare, and environmental issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-16T18:10:47Z)
• Generating Fact Checking Explanations [52.879658637466605]
  A crucial piece of the puzzle that is still missing is to understand how to automate the most elaborate part of the process. This paper provides the first study of how these explanations can be generated automatically based on available claim context. Our results indicate that optimising both objectives at the same time, rather than training them separately, improves the performance of a fact checking system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-13T05:23:25Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.