Scientific QA System with Verifiable Answers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.11485v1
• Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 08:21:02 GMT
• Title: Scientific QA System with Verifiable Answers
• Authors: Adela Ljajić, Miloš Košprdić, Bojana Bašaragin, Darija Medvecki, Lorenzo Cassano, Nikola Milošević,
• Abstract summary: We introduce the VerifAI project, a pioneering open-source scientific question-answering system. The components of the system are (1) an Information Retrieval system combining semantic and lexical search techniques over scientific papers (Mistral 7B) and retrieved articles to generate claims with references to the articles from which it was derived, (2) a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) module using fine-tuned generative model (Mistral 7B) and retrieved articles to generate claims with references to the articles from which it was derived, and (3) a Verification engine, based on a fine-tuned DeBERTa
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: In this paper, we introduce the VerifAI project, a pioneering open-source scientific question-answering system, designed to provide answers that are not only referenced but also automatically vetted and verifiable. The components of the system are (1) an Information Retrieval system combining semantic and lexical search techniques over scientific papers (PubMed), (2) a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) module using fine-tuned generative model (Mistral 7B) and retrieved articles to generate claims with references to the articles from which it was derived, and (3) a Verification engine, based on a fine-tuned DeBERTa and XLM-RoBERTa models on Natural Language Inference task using SciFACT dataset. The verification engine cross-checks the generated claim and the article from which the claim was derived, verifying whether there may have been any hallucinations in generating the claim. By leveraging the Information Retrieval and RAG modules, Verif.ai excels in generating factual information from a vast array of scientific sources. At the same time, the Verification engine rigorously double-checks this output, ensuring its accuracy and reliability. This dual-stage process plays a crucial role in acquiring and confirming factual information, significantly enhancing the information landscape. Our methodology could significantly enhance scientists' productivity, concurrently fostering trust in applying generative language models within scientific domains, where hallucinations and misinformation are unacceptable.

Related papers

• Can Large Language Models Detect Misinformation in Scientific News Reporting? [1.0344642971058586]
  This paper investigates whether it is possible to use large language models (LLMs) to detect misinformation in scientific reporting. We first present a new labeled dataset SciNews, containing 2.4k scientific news stories drawn from trusted and untrustworthy sources. We identify dimensions of scientific validity in science news articles and explore how this can be integrated into the automated detection of scientific misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-22T04:07:00Z)
• Verif.ai: Towards an Open-Source Scientific Generative Question-Answering System with Referenced and Verifiable Answers [0.0]
  We present the current progress of the project Verifai, an open-source scientific generative question-answering system with referenced and verified answers. The components of the system are (1) an information retrieval system combining semantic and lexical search techniques over scientific papers (Mistral 7B) taking top answers and generating answers with references to the papers from which the claim was derived, and (3) a verification engine that cross-checks the generated claim and the abstract or paper from which the claim was derived.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T10:25:01Z)
• Knowledge-Augmented Language Model Verification [68.6099592486075]
  Recent Language Models (LMs) have shown impressive capabilities in generating texts with the knowledge internalized in parameters. We propose to verify the output and the knowledge of the knowledge-augmented LMs with a separate verifier. Our results show that the proposed verifier effectively identifies retrieval and generation errors, allowing LMs to provide more factually correct outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T15:40:00Z)
• Generating Scientific Claims for Zero-Shot Scientific Fact Checking [54.62086027306609]
  Automated scientific fact checking is difficult due to the complexity of scientific language and a lack of significant amounts of training data. We propose scientific claim generation, the task of generating one or more atomic and verifiable claims from scientific sentences. We also demonstrate its usefulness in zero-shot fact checking for biomedical claims.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-24T11:29:20Z)
• Synthetic Disinformation Attacks on Automated Fact Verification Systems [53.011635547834025]
  We explore the sensitivity of automated fact-checkers to synthetic adversarial evidence in two simulated settings. We show that these systems suffer significant performance drops against these attacks. We discuss the growing threat of modern NLG systems as generators of disinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-18T19:01:01Z)
• RerrFact: Reduced Evidence Retrieval Representations for Scientific Claim Verification [4.052777228128475]
  We propose a modular approach that sequentially carries out binary classification for every prediction subtask. We carry out two-step stance predictions that first differentiate non-relevant rationales and then identify supporting or refuting rationales for a given claim. Experimentally, our system RerrFact with no fine-tuning, simple design, and a fraction of model parameters fairs competitively on the leaderboard.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-05T21:52:45Z)
• Automated Creation and Human-assisted Curation of Computable Scientific Models from Code and Text [2.3746609573239756]
  Domain experts cannot gain a complete understanding of the implementation of a scientific model if they are not familiar with the code. We develop a system for the automated creation and human-assisted curation of scientific models. We present experimental results obtained using a dataset of code and associated text derived from NASA's Hypersonic Aerodynamics website.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-28T17:31:38Z)
• A Controllable Model of Grounded Response Generation [122.7121624884747]
  Current end-to-end neural conversation models inherently lack the flexibility to impose semantic control in the response generation process. We propose a framework that we call controllable grounded response generation (CGRG) We show that using this framework, a transformer based model with a novel inductive attention mechanism, trained on a conversation-like Reddit dataset, outperforms strong generation baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T21:22:08Z)
• Fact or Fiction: Verifying Scientific Claims [53.29101835904273]
  We introduce scientific claim verification, a new task to select abstracts from the research literature containing evidence that SUPPORTS or REFUTES a given scientific claim. We construct SciFact, a dataset of 1.4K expert-written scientific claims paired with evidence-containing abstracts annotated with labels and rationales. We show that our system is able to verify claims related to COVID-19 by identifying evidence from the CORD-19 corpus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-30T17:22:57Z)
• 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.