TRUST Agents: A Collaborative Multi-Agent Framework for Fake News Detection, Explainable Verification, and Logic-Aware Claim Reasoning
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.12184v1
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 01:31:14 GMT
- Title: TRUST Agents: A Collaborative Multi-Agent Framework for Fake News Detection, Explainable Verification, and Logic-Aware Claim Reasoning
- Abstract summary: TRUST Agents is a framework for explainable fact verification and fake news detection.<n>It identifies verifiable claims, retrieves relevant evidence, compares claims against that evidence, reasons under uncertainty, and generates explanations that humans can inspect.<n>To handle complex claims more effectively, we introduce a decomposer agent inspired by LoCal-style claim decomposition, a Delphi-inspired multi-agent jury with specialized verifier personas, and a logic aggregator.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: TRUST Agents is a collaborative multi-agent framework for explainable fact verification and fake news detection. Rather than treating verification as a simple true-or-false classification task, the system identifies verifiable claims, retrieves relevant evidence, compares claims against that evidence, reasons under uncertainty, and generates explanations that humans can inspect. The baseline pipeline consists of four specialized agents. A claim extractor uses named entity recognition, dependency parsing, and LLM-based extraction to identify factual claims. A retrieval agent performs hybrid sparse and dense search using BM25 and FAISS. A verifier agent compares claims with retrieved evidence and produces verdicts with calibrated confidence. An explainer agent then generates a human-readable report with explicit evidence citations. To handle complex claims more effectively, we introduce a research-oriented extension with three additional components: a decomposer agent inspired by LoCal-style claim decomposition, a Delphi-inspired multi-agent jury with specialized verifier personas, and a logic aggregator that combines atomic verdicts using conjunction, disjunction, negation, and implication. We evaluate both pipelines on the LIAR benchmark against fine-tuned BERT, fine-tuned RoBERTa, and a zero-shot LLM baseline. Although supervised encoders remain stronger on raw metrics, TRUST Agents improves interpretability, evidence transparency, and reasoning over compound claims. Results also show that retrieval quality and uncertainty calibration remain the main bottlenecks in trustworthy automated fact verification.
Related papers
- ReflectFact: Self-Reflective Agents for Improving Comprehension and Reasoning in Multi-Hop Fact Verification [10.886692231174358]
Multi-hop fact verification is critical for combating misinformation on social media.<n>Recent methods rely on multi-agent collaboration to decompose fact verification into specialized subtasks.<n>We propose ReflectFact, a novel self-reflective agent framework for multi-hop fact verification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-13T06:41:56Z) - Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents? [61.49434544687523]
We introduce REFLECT, a meta-evaluation benchmark targeting fine-grained failure detection in agentic environments.<n> REFLECT defines a detailed taxonomy of process- and outcome-level failure modes, instantiated by performing controlled and localized interventions.<n>Our experiments show that even the best-performing models achieve overall accuracies below 55% across reasoning, tool-use, and report-quality failures.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-18T23:55:08Z) - AgentV-RL: Scaling Reward Modeling with Agentic Verifier [63.55502685076245]
Verifiers have been demonstrated to enhance LLM reasoning via test-time scaling (TTS)<n>We propose Agentic Verifier, a framework that transforms reward modeling into a multi-turn, tool-augmented deliberative process.<n>We show that Agentic Verifier yields consistent performance gains under both parallel and sequential TTS.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-17T12:27:36Z) - DeepFact: Co-Evolving Benchmarks and Agents for Deep Research Factuality [49.62610727661819]
Existing fact-checkers are primarily designed for general-domain, factoid-style atomic claims.<n>We propose Audit-then-Score (AtS), where benchmark labels and rationales are explicitly revisable.<n>We instantiate AtS as DeepFact-Bench, a versioned DRR factuality benchmark with auditable rationales.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-06T05:05:57Z) - 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) - Retrieval and Argumentation Enhanced Multi-Agent LLMs for Judgmental Forecasting [22.109381003702595]
We propose a novel multi-agent framework for claim verification.<n>Different agents may disagree on claim veracity and bring specific evidence for and against the claims.<n>We observe that combining evidence from agents can improve forecasting accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-28T11:12:43Z) - Co-Sight: Enhancing LLM-Based Agents via Conflict-Aware Meta-Verification and Trustworthy Reasoning with Structured Facts [18.221173068008603]
Co-Sight turns reasoning into a falsifiable and auditable process.<n>Two mechanisms: Conflict-Aware Meta-Verification (CAMV) and Trustworthy Reasoning with Structured Facts (TRSF)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-24T15:14:14Z) - Veri-R1: Toward Precise and Faithful Claim Verification via Online Reinforcement Learning [53.05161493434908]
Claim verification with large language models (LLMs) has recently attracted growing attention, due to their strong reasoning capabilities and transparent verification processes.<n>We introduce Veri-R1, an online reinforcement learning framework that enables an LLM to interact with a search engine and to receive reward signals that explicitly shape its planning, retrieval, and reasoning behaviors.<n> Empirical results show that Veri-R1 improves joint accuracy by up to 30% and doubles the evidence score, often surpassing its larger-scale model counterparts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-02T11:49:48Z) - VulAgent: Hypothesis-Validation based Multi-Agent Vulnerability Detection [55.957275374847484]
VulAgent is a multi-agent vulnerability detection framework based on hypothesis validation.<n>It implements a semantics-sensitive, multi-view detection pipeline, each aligned to a specific analysis perspective.<n>On average, VulAgent improves overall accuracy by 6.6%, increases the correct identification rate of vulnerable--fixed code pairs by up to 450%, and reduces the false positive rate by about 36%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-15T02:25:38Z) - 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) - CRAVE: A Conflicting Reasoning Approach for Explainable Claim Verification Using LLMs [15.170312674645535]
CRAVE is a Conflicting Reasoning Approach for explainable claim VErification.<n>It can verify complex claims based on the conflicting rationales reasoned by large language models.<n>CRAVE achieves much better performance than state-of-the-art methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-21T07:20:31Z) - 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) - From Relevance to Utility: Evidence Retrieval with Feedback for Fact Verification [118.03466985807331]
We argue that, rather than relevance, for FV we need to focus on the utility that a claim verifier derives from the retrieved evidence.<n>We introduce the feedback-based evidence retriever(FER) that optimize the evidence retrieval process by incorporating feedback from the claim verifier.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-18T02:59:38Z)
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.