Complex Claim Verification with Evidence Retrieved in the Wild

Overview

• This paper presents a fully automated pipeline for checking real-world claims by retrieving raw evidence from the web.
• The pipeline includes five components: claim decomposition, raw document retrieval, fine-grained evidence retrieval, claim-focused summarization, and veracity judgment.
• The researchers conduct experiments on complex political claims in the ClaimDecomp dataset and show that the aggregated evidence produced by their pipeline improves veracity judgments.

Plain English Explanation

The paper addresses the challenge of [object Object], which is a crucial task for combating the spread of misinformation. Prior research has made simplifying assumptions about the availability of evidence, either assuming no access to evidence, access to evidence curated by a human fact-checker, or access to evidence available long after the claim has been made.

In contrast, this paper presents the first fully automated pipeline that can check real-world claims by retrieving raw evidence from the web, modelling the realistic scenario where an emerging claim needs to be quickly verified. The pipeline starts by [object Object] into its key components, then retrieves relevant documents from the web, extracts fine-grained evidence, summarizes the evidence in a claim-focused way, and finally makes a judgment on the veracity of the claim.

The researchers test their pipeline on complex political claims from the ClaimDecomp dataset, and find that the aggregated evidence it produces can improve the accuracy of veracity judgments. They also conduct a human evaluation, which suggests that the evidence summaries generated by the system are reliable (i.e., do not contain made-up information) and relevant to answering key questions about a claim, even when the system cannot surface a complete set of evidence.

Technical Explanation

This paper presents a [object Object] by retrieving raw evidence from the web. The pipeline consists of five key components:

1. Claim Decomposition: The system first breaks down the input claim into its key components (e.g., entities, actions, locations) using a claim decomposition model.

2. Raw Document Retrieval: Next, the system retrieves a set of potentially relevant documents from the web based on the decomposed claim, but restricts the search to only documents available prior to the claim's making.

3. Fine-Grained Evidence Retrieval: The system then extracts fine-grained evidence snippets from the retrieved documents that are most relevant to answering the key components of the claim.

4. Claim-Focused Summarization: The system synthesizes the relevant evidence snippets into a concise summary that is focused on addressing the original claim.

5. Veracity Judgment: Finally, the system makes a judgment on the veracity of the claim based on the aggregated evidence.

The researchers evaluate this pipeline on the ClaimDecomp dataset of complex political claims. They find that the evidence summaries produced by the system can significantly improve the accuracy of veracity judgments compared to baselines. A human evaluation also suggests that the summaries are reliable (do not contain hallucinated information) and relevant to answering key questions about the claims.

Critical Analysis

The key strength of this work is that it presents the first fully automated pipeline for fact-checking real-world claims by retrieving raw evidence from the web, rather than making simplifying assumptions about evidence availability. This models a more realistic scenario where an emerging claim needs to be quickly verified.

However, the authors acknowledge several limitations and areas for future work. First, the pipeline's performance is still limited by the quality of the underlying retrieval and summarization models, which could be improved with further research. Second, the experiments are focused on political claims, so the generalizability to other domains is unclear.

Additionally, while the human evaluation suggests the system's summaries are reliable, there may still be cases where the system hallucinates or misinterprets evidence in subtle ways. Further research is needed to better understand the failure modes and robustness of such automated fact-checking systems.

It would also be interesting to see how this pipeline could be extended to handle evolving claims and evidence over time, rather than just a static snapshot. [object Object] could be relevant here.

Overall, this paper makes an important contribution by moving towards more realistic and fully automated fact-checking, but there is still significant room for improvement and further research in this critical area of [object Object].

Conclusion

This paper presents the first fully automated pipeline for checking real-world claims by retrieving raw evidence from the web, in contrast to prior work that made simplifying assumptions about evidence availability. The pipeline decomposes claims, retrieves relevant documents, extracts fine-grained evidence, summarizes the evidence, and makes a veracity judgment.

Experiments on complex political claims show that the aggregated evidence produced by this pipeline can improve the accuracy of veracity judgments. A human evaluation also suggests the system's evidence summaries are reliable and relevant, even when they cannot surface a complete set of evidence.

While this work represents an important step towards more realistic and automated fact-checking, there is still significant room for improvement, particularly in enhancing the underlying retrieval and summarization models, expanding to other domains, and addressing issues of robustness and evolving claims over time. Continued research in this area is crucial for combating the spread of misinformation in the real world.