FactAppeal: Identifying Epistemic Factual Appeals in News Media

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.10627v1
• Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 14:14:54 GMT
• Title: FactAppeal: Identifying Epistemic Factual Appeals in News Media
• Abstract summary: Epistemic Appeal Identification identifies whether factual statements have been anchored by external sources or evidence.<n>We present FactAppeal, a manually annotated dataset of 3,226 English-language news sentences.
• Score: 1.6822770693792826
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: How is a factual claim made credible? We propose the novel task of Epistemic Appeal Identification, which identifies whether and how factual statements have been anchored by external sources or evidence. To advance research on this task, we present FactAppeal, a manually annotated dataset of 3,226 English-language news sentences. Unlike prior resources that focus solely on claim detection and verification, FactAppeal identifies the nuanced epistemic structures and evidentiary basis underlying these claims and used to support them. FactAppeal contains span-level annotations which identify factual statements and mentions of sources on which they rely. Moreover, the annotations include fine-grained characteristics of factual appeals such as the type of source (e.g. Active Participant, Witness, Expert, Direct Evidence), whether it is mentioned by name, mentions of the source's role and epistemic credentials, attribution to the source via direct or indirect quotation, and other features. We model the task with a range of encoder models and generative decoder models in the 2B-9B parameter range. Our best performing model, based on Gemma 2 9B, achieves a macro-F1 score of 0.73.

Related papers

• Data Citation for Large Language Models: A Challenge [3.18510458102085]
  This paper argues that data citation for large language models is an open challenge.<n>We ask how such models should cite data so that outputs stay verifiable, provenance stays traceable, and credit reaches data creators and curators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T11:44:55Z)
• From Articles to Premises: Building PrimeFacts, an Extraction Methodology and Resource for Fact-Checking Evidence [27.242475349674155]
  PrimeFacts is a methodology for extracting fine-grained evidence from full fact-checking articles.<n>We compile 13,106 PolitiFact articles with claims, verdicts, and all referenced sources.<n>Our framework rewrites anchor sentences into stand-alone, context-independent premises.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T10:58:29Z)
• FactReview: Evidence-Grounded Reviews with Literature Positioning and Execution-Based Claim Verification [57.196748998757954]
  We present FactReview, an evidence-grounded reviewing system that combines claim extraction, literature positioning, and execution-based claim verification.<n>Given a submission, FactReview identifies major claims and reported results, retrieves nearby work to clarify the paper's technical position, and, when code is available, executes the released repository.<n>It then produces a concise review and an evidence report that assigns each major claim one of five labels: Supported, Supported by the paper, Partially supported, In conflict, or Inconclusive.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-05T11:45:22Z)
• Multi-Sourced, Multi-Agent Evidence Retrieval for Fact-Checking [47.47518672198846]
  Misinformation spreading over the Internet poses a significant threat to both societies and individuals.<n>Previous methods rely on semantic and social-contextual patterns learned from training data.<n>We propose WKGFC, which exploits authorized open knowledge graph as a core resource of evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T19:29:01Z)
• The Missing Parts: Augmenting Fact Verification with Half-Truth Detection [20.011177314734887]
  Many real-world claims are half-truths, factually correct yet misleading due to the omission of critical context.<n>We introduce the task of half-truth detection, and propose PolitiFact-Hidden, a new benchmark with 15k political claims annotated with sentence-level evidence alignment and inferred claim intent.<n>We present TRACER, a modular re-assessment framework that identifies omission-based misinformation by aligning evidence, inferring implied intent, and estimating the causal impact of hidden content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T10:06:38Z)
• Document Attribution: Examining Citation Relationships using Large Language Models [62.46146670035751]
  We propose a zero-shot approach that frames attribution as a straightforward textual entailment task.<n>We also explore the role of the attention mechanism in enhancing the attribution process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-09T04:40:11Z)
• CORRECT: Context- and Reference-Augmented Reasoning and Prompting for Fact-Checking [14.890042094350411]
  We propose a novel method, Context- and Reference-augmented Reasoning and Prompting.<n>For evidence reasoning, we construct a three-layer evidence graph with evidence, context, and reference layers.<n>For verdict prediction, we design evidence-conditioned prompt encoder, which produces unique prompt embeddings for each claim.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-09T01:41:15Z)
• Contrastive Learning to Improve Retrieval for Real-world Fact Checking [84.57583869042791]
  We present Contrastive Fact-Checking Reranker (CFR), an improved retriever for fact-checking complex claims. We leverage the AVeriTeC dataset, which annotates subquestions for claims with human written answers from evidence documents. We find a 6% improvement in veracity classification accuracy on the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T00:09:50Z)
• FarFetched: Entity-centric Reasoning and Claim Validation for the Greek Language based on Textually Represented Environments [0.3874856507026475]
  We address the need for automated claim validation based on the aggregated evidence derived from multiple online news sources. We introduce an entity-centric reasoning framework in which latent connections between events, actions, or statements are revealed. Our approach tries to fill the gap in automated claim validation for less-resourced languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-13T13:30:20Z)
• AFaCTA: Assisting the Annotation of Factual Claim Detection with Reliable LLM Annotators [38.523194864405326]
  AFaCTA is a novel framework that assists in the annotation of factual claims. AFaCTA calibrates its annotation confidence with consistency along three predefined reasoning paths. Our analyses also result in PoliClaim, a comprehensive claim detection dataset spanning diverse political topics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T20:59:57Z)
• 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)
• Rumor Detection with Self-supervised Learning on Texts and Social Graph [101.94546286960642]
  We propose contrastive self-supervised learning on heterogeneous information sources, so as to reveal their relations and characterize rumors better. We term this framework as Self-supervised Rumor Detection (SRD) Extensive experiments on three real-world datasets validate the effectiveness of SRD for automatic rumor detection on social media.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-19T12:10:03Z)
• Mining Fine-grained Semantics via Graph Neural Networks for Evidence-based Fake News Detection [20.282527436527765]
  We propose a unified Graph-based sEmantic sTructure mining framework, namely GET in short. We model claims and evidences as graph-structured data and capture the long-distance semantic dependency. After obtaining contextual semantic information, our model reduces information redundancy by performing graph structure learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-18T11:28:36Z)
• AmbiFC: Fact-Checking Ambiguous Claims with Evidence [57.7091560922174]
  We present AmbiFC, a fact-checking dataset with 10k claims derived from real-world information needs. We analyze disagreements arising from ambiguity when comparing claims against evidence in AmbiFC. We develop models for predicting veracity handling this ambiguity via soft labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-01T17:40:08Z)

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.