VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.08611v1
• Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 14:56:40 GMT
• Title: VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checking
• Authors: Mark Rothermel, Marcus Kornmann, Marcus Rohrbach, Anna Rohrbach,
• Abstract summary: We introduce Verified Theses and Statements (VeriTaS), the first dynamic benchmark for multimodal Automated Fact-Checking (AFC)<n>VeriTaS comprises 24,000 real-world claims from 108 professional fact-checking organizations across 54 languages.<n>We demonstrate that the automated annotations closely match human judgments.
• Score: 16.671088521668864
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: The growing scale of online misinformation urgently demands Automated Fact-Checking (AFC). Existing benchmarks for evaluating AFC systems, however, are largely limited in terms of task scope, modalities, domain, language diversity, realism, or coverage of misinformation types. Critically, they are static, thus subject to data leakage as their claims enter the pretraining corpora of LLMs. As a result, benchmark performance no longer reliably reflects the actual ability to verify claims. We introduce Verified Theses and Statements (VeriTaS), the first dynamic benchmark for multimodal AFC, designed to remain robust under ongoing large-scale pretraining of foundation models. VeriTaS currently comprises 24,000 real-world claims from 108 professional fact-checking organizations across 54 languages, covering textual and audiovisual content. Claims are added quarterly via a fully automated seven-stage pipeline that normalizes claim formulation, retrieves original media, and maps heterogeneous expert verdicts to a novel, standardized, and disentangled scoring scheme with textual justifications. Through human evaluation, we demonstrate that the automated annotations closely match human judgments. We commit to update VeriTaS in the future, establishing a leakage-resistant benchmark, supporting meaningful AFC evaluation in the era of rapidly evolving foundation models. We will make the code and data publicly available.

Related papers

• GISA: A Benchmark for General Information-Seeking Assistant [102.30831921333755]
  GISA is a benchmark for General Information-Seeking Assistants comprising 373 human-crafted queries.<n>It integrates both deep reasoning and broad information aggregation within unified tasks, and includes a live subset with periodically updated answers to resist memorization.<n>Experiments on mainstream LLMs and commercial search products reveal that even the best-performing model achieves only 19.30% exact match score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-09T11:44:15Z)
• Towards Comprehensive Stage-wise Benchmarking of Large Language Models in Fact-Checking [64.97768177044355]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world fact-checking systems.<n>We present FactArena, a fully automated arena-style evaluation framework.<n>Our analyses reveal significant discrepancies between static claim-verification accuracy and end-to-end fact-checking competence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-06T02:51:56Z)
• Encyclo-K: Evaluating LLMs with Dynamically Composed Knowledge Statements [78.87065404966002]
  Existing benchmarks predominantly curate questions at the question level.<n>We propose Encyclo-K, a statement-based benchmark that rethinks benchmark construction from the ground up.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-31T13:55:54Z)
• LiveSearchBench: An Automatically Constructed Benchmark for Retrieval and Reasoning over Dynamic Knowledge [31.40589987269264]
  We present LiveSearchBench, an automated pipeline for constructing retrieval-dependent benchmarks from recent knowledge updates.<n>Our method computes deltas between successive Wikidata snapshots, filters candidate triples for quality, and synthesizes natural-language questions at three levels of reasoning difficulty.<n> Experiments show a pronounced performance drop when models confront facts that post-date pretraining, with the gap most salient on multi-hop queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-03T10:00:49Z)
• UniGenBench++: A Unified Semantic Evaluation Benchmark for Text-to-Image Generation [40.644151228285246]
  We introduce UniGenBench++, a unified semantic assessment benchmark for text-to-image generation.<n>It comprises 600 prompts organized hierarchically to ensure both coverage and efficiency.<n>It provides both English and Chinese versions of each prompt in short and long forms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T14:56:46Z)
• Towards Robust Fact-Checking: A Multi-Agent System with Advanced Evidence Retrieval [1.515687944002438]
  The rapid spread of misinformation in the digital era poses significant challenges to public discourse.<n>Traditional human-led fact-checking methods, while credible, struggle with the volume and velocity of online content.<n>This paper proposes a novel multi-agent system for automated fact-checking that enhances accuracy, efficiency, and explainability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-22T02:39:27Z)
• DEFAME: Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts [35.952854524873246]
  Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts (DEFAME) is a zero-shot MLLM pipeline for open-domain, text-image claim verification.<n>DEFAME operates in a six-stage process, dynamically selecting the tools and search depth to extract and evaluate textual and visual evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T19:11:18Z)
• FactLens: Benchmarking Fine-Grained Fact Verification [6.814173254027381]
  We advocate for a shift towards fine-grained verification, where complex claims are broken down into smaller sub-claims for individual verification.<n>We introduce FactLens, a benchmark for evaluating fine-grained fact verification, with metrics and automated evaluators of sub-claim quality.<n>Our results show alignment between automated FactLens evaluators and human judgments, and we discuss the impact of sub-claim characteristics on the overall verification performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-08T21:26:57Z)
• MMIE: Massive Multimodal Interleaved Comprehension Benchmark for Large Vision-Language Models [71.36392373876505]
  We introduce MMIE, a large-scale benchmark for evaluating interleaved multimodal comprehension and generation in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs)<n>MMIE comprises 20K meticulously curated multimodal queries, spanning 3 categories, 12 fields, and 102 subfields, including mathematics, coding, physics, literature, health, and arts.<n>It supports both interleaved inputs and outputs, offering a mix of multiple-choice and open-ended question formats to evaluate diverse competencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T04:15:00Z)
• From Chaos to Clarity: Claim Normalization to Empower Fact-Checking [57.024192702939736]
  Claim Normalization (aka ClaimNorm) aims to decompose complex and noisy social media posts into more straightforward and understandable forms. We propose CACN, a pioneering approach that leverages chain-of-thought and claim check-worthiness estimation. Our experiments demonstrate that CACN outperforms several baselines across various evaluation measures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-22T16:07:06Z)
• 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.