Cross-platform epistemic verification for improving factual reliability in AI-generated news summarization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.05302v1
• Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 18:01:24 GMT
• Title: Cross-platform epistemic verification for improving factual reliability in AI-generated news summarization
• Abstract summary: This study proposes Multi-source Evidence Consen- sus Verification (MECV) for AI-generated news summariza- tion.<n>Instead of depending on a single retrieval channel, MECV aggregates evidence from multiple heterogeneous sources, including the source document, Wikipedia, and open-web retrieval.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: This study proposes Multi-source Evidence Consen- sus Verification (MECV), a post-hoc hallucination cor- rection framework for AI-generated news summariza- tion. Instead of depending on a single retrieval channel, MECV aggregates evidence from multiple heterogeneous sources, including the source document, Wikipedia, and open-web retrieval. The framework further incorporates a multi-LLM jury mechanism that estimates factual reliabil- ity through contradiction-aware consensus scoring across verifier models. Claims identified as potentially unsup- ported are revised through iterative minimal-edit refine- ment. The proposed framework is evaluated on the SummEd- its benchmark using GPT-4o-mini and DeepSeek-Chat as the verifier jury, with Qwen-Plus as the orchestra- tor. Experimental results show that MECV improves fac- tual consistency while preserving the semantic structure of the original summaries. The findings further suggest that agreement across heterogeneous evidence sources can serve as a useful signal for identifying factual uncertainty in AI-generated summaries, including in information- sensitive domains such as financial news aggregation. This study contributes to research on trustworthy AI and automated journalism by introducing a multi-source verification framework for hallucination correction and demonstrating the value of consensus-based verification for improving factual reliability in AI-generated news summarization.

Related papers

• HiEviDR-Bench: A Benchmark for Hierarchical Evidence Aggregation in Deep Research [52.87128503345243]
  We introduce HiEviDR-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Hierarchical Evidence Aggregation in Deep Research.<n>HiEviDR-Bench represents each instance with an explicit evidence graph that captures evidence selection, cross-source linking, and aggregation.<n>We develop a traceability-oriented evaluation framework with five dimensions: report quality, evidence traceability, citation accuracy, claim verification, and answer correctness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-27T23:50:46Z)
• ToE: A Hierarchical and Explainable Claim Verification Framework with Dynamic Multi-source Evidence Retrieval and Aggregation [23.934630478971517]
  ToE is a hierarchical evidence reasoning framework for automated fact-checking.<n>ToE integrates a reinforcement learning-driven multi-source retrieval agent, an evidence evaluation agent, and an argument tree aggregation algorithm.<n>We show that ToE achieves improvements ranging from 4 to 24 percentage points over competitive baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-26T05:35:27Z)
• Faithful by Construction: Claim-Anchored Attribution for Multi-Document Summarization [1.1168121941015015]
  Claim-Anchored Multi-document Summarization framework ( CAMS)<n>Claim-Anchored Multi-document Summarization framework ( CAMS)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-22T22:39:08Z)
• MAVEN: Multi-Agent Verification-Elaboration Network with In-Step Epistemic Auditing [18.35295672031847]
  MAVEN is a framework designed to transform LLMs into deliberate reasoners through explicit role-decoupling.<n>MAVEN consistently outperforms latent reasoning models such as GEMINI-3.1-Pro.<n>MAVEN is fully model-agnostic, serving as a strong and transferable reasoning booster.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T12:11:08Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Depression Estimation via Disentangled Evidential Learning [50.22167852149165]
  We propose EviDep, an evidential learning framework that jointly quantifies depression severity.<n>EviDep enforces strict information integrity to guarantee robust evidence synthesis.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art predictive accuracy and superior uncertainty calibration, delivering a robust fail-safe mechanism for trustworthy clinical screening.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T13:27:11Z)
• Leveraging LLM Parametric Knowledge for Fact Checking without Retrieval [60.25608870901428]
  Trustworthiness is a core research challenge for agentic AI systems built on Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We propose the task of fact-checking without retrieval, focusing on the verification of arbitrary natural language claims, independent of their source robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-05T18:42:51Z)
• HiEAG: Evidence-Augmented Generation for Out-of-Context Misinformation Detection [8.609016163081744]
  We propose HiEAG, a novel Hierarchical Evidence-Augmented Generation framework to refine external consistency checking.<n>Our approach decomposes external consistency checking into a comprehensive engine pipeline, which integrates reranking and rewriting, apart from retrieval.<n>Our approach enables explanation for judgment, and achieves impressive performance with instruction tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T01:11:48Z)
• Towards Real-Time Fake News Detection under Evidence Scarcity [66.58597356379907]
  We propose Evaluation-Aware Selection of Experts (EASE), a novel framework for real-time fake news detection.<n>EASE adapts its decision-making process according to the assessed sufficiency of available evidence.<n>We introduce RealTimeNews-25, a new benchmark for evaluating model generalization on emerging news with limited evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T11:11:46Z)
• Resolving Conflicting Evidence in Automated Fact-Checking: A Study on Retrieval-Augmented LLMs [12.923119372847834]
  This paper presents the first systematic evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) models for fact-checking.<n>Experiments reveal critical vulnerabilities in state-of-the-art RAG methods, particularly in resolving conflicts stemming from differences in media source credibility.<n>Our results show that effectively incorporating source credibility significantly enhances the ability of RAG models to resolve conflicting evidence and improve fact-checking performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T11:35:03Z)
• Trusted Multi-View Classification with Dynamic Evidential Fusion [73.35990456162745]
  We propose a novel multi-view classification algorithm, termed trusted multi-view classification (TMC) TMC provides a new paradigm for multi-view learning by dynamically integrating different views at an evidence level. Both theoretical and experimental results validate the effectiveness of the proposed model in accuracy, robustness and trustworthiness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-25T03:48:49Z)
• Trusted Multi-View Classification [76.73585034192894]
  We propose a novel multi-view classification method, termed trusted multi-view classification. It provides a new paradigm for multi-view learning by dynamically integrating different views at an evidence level. The proposed algorithm jointly utilizes multiple views to promote both classification reliability and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-03T13:30:26Z)

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.