Automated Justification Production for Claim Veracity in Fact Checking: A Survey on Architectures and Approaches

Read original: arXiv:2407.12853 - Published 7/19/2024 by Islam Eldifrawi, Shengrui Wang, Amine Trabelsi

Automated Justification Production for Claim Veracity in Fact Checking: A Survey on Architectures and Approaches

Overview

Examines the state of research on automated systems for producing justifications to verify the accuracy of claims in fact-checking
Covers different architectures and approaches used in these systems
Highlights key challenges and areas for future development

Plain English Explanation

This paper provides an overview of the current research on automated systems that can verify the truthfulness of claims by generating supporting evidence or justifications. These systems are important for fact-checking in an age of widespread misinformation and false claims online.

The paper explores the different ways researchers have designed these automated fact-checking systems, including the underlying architectures and approaches they have used. It also discusses the benefits and limitations of these systems, and highlights areas where more research is needed to improve their performance and usefulness.

Overall, this survey provides a helpful overview of the state of the art in automated fact-checking, which has important implications for combating the spread of misinformation and ensuring the reliability of information online.

Technical Explanation

The paper reviews the current research on automated systems for verifying the truthfulness of claims by generating supporting evidence or justifications. These systems typically work by taking a claim as input, searching for relevant information from a knowledge base or corpus of text, and then producing a justification that explains whether the claim is true or false.

The authors examine the different architectures and approaches that have been used in these automated fact-checking systems. This includes models that use natural language processing, knowledge graphs, information retrieval, and other techniques to identify relevant evidence and generate justifications.

The paper also discusses the benefits and limitations of these automated systems, such as their ability to scale and process large amounts of information quickly, but also their potential for bias and errors. The authors highlight areas where further research is needed, such as improving the generation of factual evidence and developing more robust and verifiable systems.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of research on automated fact-checking systems, but it also acknowledges several important limitations and areas for further development.

One key caveat is the potential for these systems to perpetuate biases or make erroneous judgments, which could have serious consequences in real-world fact-checking applications. The authors note that more research is needed to understand and mitigate these issues.

Additionally, the paper highlights the challenge of generating high-quality justifications that are both informative and trustworthy. Existing systems may struggle to provide sufficient evidence or context to fully explain their verdicts, which could undermine their credibility and usefulness.

Further research is also needed to improve the robustness and verifiability of these systems, ensuring that their outputs can be reliably checked and validated by human fact-checkers or other automated systems.

Overall, while the paper demonstrates the significant progress that has been made in this field, it also underscores the ongoing challenges and the need for continued innovation to develop truly reliable and effective automated fact-checking technologies.

Conclusion

This survey paper provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of research on automated systems for verifying the truthfulness of claims and generating supporting justifications. The authors examine the different architectures and approaches used in these systems, as well as their benefits and limitations.

The paper highlights the important role these automated fact-checking systems can play in combating the spread of misinformation and ensuring the reliability of information online. However, it also underscores the need for further research to address key challenges, such as mitigating bias, improving justification quality, and enhancing system robustness and verifiability.

As the prevalence of false claims and online misinformation continues to grow, the development of effective and trustworthy automated fact-checking technologies will become increasingly crucial. This survey provides a valuable resource for understanding the current state of the art and identifying areas for future innovation in this critical field.

This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

Automated Justification Production for Claim Veracity in Fact Checking: A Survey on Architectures and Approaches

Islam Eldifrawi, Shengrui Wang, Amine Trabelsi

Automated Fact-Checking (AFC) is the automated verification of claim accuracy. AFC is crucial in discerning truth from misinformation, especially given the huge amounts of content are generated online daily. Current research focuses on predicting claim veracity through metadata analysis and language scrutiny, with an emphasis on justifying verdicts. This paper surveys recent methodologies, proposing a comprehensive taxonomy and presenting the evolution of research in that landscape. A comparative analysis of methodologies and future directions for improving fact-checking explainability are also discussed.

7/19/2024

AFaCTA: Assisting the Annotation of Factual Claim Detection with Reliable LLM Annotators

Jingwei Ni, Minjing Shi, Dominik Stammbach, Mrinmaya Sachan, Elliott Ash, Markus Leippold

With the rise of generative AI, automated fact-checking methods to combat misinformation are becoming more and more important. However, factual claim detection, the first step in a fact-checking pipeline, suffers from two key issues that limit its scalability and generalizability: (1) inconsistency in definitions of the task and what a claim is, and (2) the high cost of manual annotation. To address (1), we review the definitions in related work and propose a unifying definition of factual claims that focuses on verifiability. To address (2), we introduce AFaCTA (Automatic Factual Claim deTection Annotator), a novel framework that assists in the annotation of factual claims with the help of large language models (LLMs). AFaCTA calibrates its annotation confidence with consistency along three predefined reasoning paths. Extensive evaluation and experiments in the domain of political speech reveal that AFaCTA can efficiently assist experts in annotating factual claims and training high-quality classifiers, and can work with or without expert supervision. Our analyses also result in PoliClaim, a comprehensive claim detection dataset spanning diverse political topics.

6/4/2024

Credible, Unreliable or Leaked?: Evidence Verification for Enhanced Automated Fact-checking

Zacharias Chrysidis, Stefanos-Iordanis Papadopoulos, Symeon Papadopoulos, Panagiotis C. Petrantonakis

Automated fact-checking (AFC) is garnering increasing attention by researchers aiming to help fact-checkers combat the increasing spread of misinformation online. While many existing AFC methods incorporate external information from the Web to help examine the veracity of claims, they often overlook the importance of verifying the source and quality of collected evidence. One overlooked challenge involves the reliance on leaked evidence, information gathered directly from fact-checking websites and used to train AFC systems, resulting in an unrealistic setting for early misinformation detection. Similarly, the inclusion of information from unreliable sources can undermine the effectiveness of AFC systems. To address these challenges, we present a comprehensive approach to evidence verification and filtering. We create the CREDible, Unreliable or LEaked (CREDULE) dataset, which consists of 91,632 articles classified as Credible, Unreliable and Fact checked (Leaked). Additionally, we introduce the EVidence VERification Network (EVVER-Net), trained on CREDULE to detect leaked and unreliable evidence in both short and long texts. EVVER-Net can be used to filter evidence collected from the Web, thus enhancing the robustness of end-to-end AFC systems. We experiment with various language models and show that EVVER-Net can demonstrate impressive performance of up to 91.5% and 94.4% accuracy, while leveraging domain credibility scores along with short or long texts, respectively. Finally, we assess the evidence provided by widely-used fact-checking datasets including LIAR-PLUS, MOCHEG, FACTIFY, NewsCLIPpings+ and VERITE, some of which exhibit concerning rates of leaked and unreliable evidence.

5/1/2024

Robust Claim Verification Through Fact Detection

Nazanin Jafari, James Allan

Claim verification can be a challenging task. In this paper, we present a method to enhance the robustness and reasoning capabilities of automated claim verification through the extraction of short facts from evidence. Our novel approach, FactDetect, leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate concise factual statements from evidence and label these facts based on their semantic relevance to the claim and evidence. The generated facts are then combined with the claim and evidence. To train a lightweight supervised model, we incorporate a fact-detection task into the claim verification process as a multitasking approach to improve both performance and explainability. We also show that augmenting FactDetect in the claim verification prompt enhances performance in zero-shot claim verification using LLMs. Our method demonstrates competitive results in the supervised claim verification model by 15% on the F1 score when evaluated for challenging scientific claim verification datasets. We also demonstrate that FactDetect can be augmented with claim and evidence for zero-shot prompting (AugFactDetect) in LLMs for verdict prediction. We show that AugFactDetect outperforms the baseline with statistical significance on three challenging scientific claim verification datasets with an average of 17.3% performance gain compared to the best performing baselines.

7/29/2024