An Explainable Framework for Misinformation Identification via Critical Question Answering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14626v1
• Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 18:24:23 GMT
• Title: An Explainable Framework for Misinformation Identification via Critical Question Answering
• Authors: Ramon Ruiz-Dolz, John Lawrence,
• Abstract summary: We propose a new explainable framework for misinformation detection based on the theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions.<n>We release NLAS-CQ, the first corpus combining 3,566 textbook-like natural language argumentation scheme instances and 4,687 corresponding answers to critical questions related to these arguments.
• Score: 2.4861619769660637
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Natural language misinformation detection approaches have been, to date, largely dependent on sequence classification methods, producing opaque systems in which the reasons behind classification as misinformation are unclear. While an effort has been made in the area of automated fact-checking to propose explainable approaches to the problem, this is not the case for automated reason-checking systems. In this paper, we propose a new explainable framework for both factual and rational misinformation detection based on the theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions. For that purpose, we create and release NLAS-CQ, the first corpus combining 3,566 textbook-like natural language argumentation scheme instances and 4,687 corresponding answers to critical questions related to these arguments. On the basis of this corpus, we implement and validate our new framework which combines classification with question answering to analyse arguments in search of misinformation, and provides the explanations in form of critical questions to the human user.

Related papers

• Dialogue-based Explanations for Logical Reasoning using Structured Argumentation [0.06138671548064355]
  We identify structural weaknesses of the state-of-the-art and propose a generic argumentation-based approach to address these problems.<n>Our work provides dialogue models as dialectic-proof procedures to compute and explain a query answer.<n>This allows us to construct dialectical proof trees as explanations, which are more expressive and arguably more intuitive than existing explanation formalisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T22:26:18Z)
• Evaluating the Rationale Understanding of Critical Reasoning in Logical Reading Comprehension [13.896697187967547]
  We crowdsource rationale texts that explain why we should select or eliminate answer options from a logical reading comprehension dataset. Experiments show that recent large language models (e.g., InstructGPT) struggle to answer the subquestions even if they are able to answer the main questions correctly.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-30T08:44:55Z)
• Clarify When Necessary: Resolving Ambiguity Through Interaction with LMs [58.620269228776294]
  We propose a task-agnostic framework for resolving ambiguity by asking users clarifying questions. We evaluate systems across three NLP applications: question answering, machine translation and natural language inference. We find that intent-sim is robust, demonstrating improvements across a wide range of NLP tasks and LMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T00:18:50Z)
• Open-Set Knowledge-Based Visual Question Answering with Inference Paths [79.55742631375063]
  The purpose of Knowledge-Based Visual Question Answering (KB-VQA) is to provide a correct answer to the question with the aid of external knowledge bases. We propose a new retriever-ranker paradigm of KB-VQA, Graph pATH rankER (GATHER for brevity) Specifically, it contains graph constructing, pruning, and path-level ranking, which not only retrieves accurate answers but also provides inference paths that explain the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-12T09:12:50Z)
• Discourse Analysis via Questions and Answers: Parsing Dependency Structures of Questions Under Discussion [57.43781399856913]
  This work adopts the linguistic framework of Questions Under Discussion (QUD) for discourse analysis. We characterize relationships between sentences as free-form questions, in contrast to exhaustive fine-grained questions. We develop the first-of-its-kind QUD that derives a dependency structure of questions over full documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-12T03:53:12Z)
• DecAF: Joint Decoding of Answers and Logical Forms for Question Answering over Knowledge Bases [81.19499764899359]
  We propose a novel framework DecAF that jointly generates both logical forms and direct answers. DecAF achieves new state-of-the-art accuracy on WebQSP, FreebaseQA, and GrailQA benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T19:51:52Z)
• Discourse Comprehension: A Question Answering Framework to Represent Sentence Connections [35.005593397252746]
  A key challenge in building and evaluating models for discourse comprehension is the lack of annotated data. This paper presents a novel paradigm that enables scalable data collection targeting the comprehension of news documents. The resulting corpus, DCQA, consists of 22,430 question-answer pairs across 607 English documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-01T04:50:26Z)
• Ranking Facts for Explaining Answers to Elementary Science Questions [1.4091801425319965]
  In elementary science exams, students select one answer from among typically four choices and can explain why they made that particular choice. We consider the novel task of generating explanations for answers from human-authored facts. Explanations are created from a human-annotated set of nearly 5,000 candidate facts in the WorldTree corpus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T06:15:11Z)
• Discrete Reasoning Templates for Natural Language Understanding [79.07883990966077]
  We present an approach that reasons about complex questions by decomposing them to simpler subquestions. We derive the final answer according to instructions in a predefined reasoning template. We show that our approach is competitive with the state-of-the-art while being interpretable and requires little supervision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-05T18:56:56Z)
• A Survey on Complex Question Answering over Knowledge Base: Recent Advances and Challenges [71.4531144086568]
  Question Answering (QA) over Knowledge Base (KB) aims to automatically answer natural language questions. Researchers have shifted their attention from simple questions to complex questions, which require more KB triples and constraint inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-26T07:13:32Z)

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.