Combating fake news
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fake news is a major threat to global democracy resulting in diminished trust in government, journalism and civil society. The public popularity of social media and social networks has caused a contagion of fake news where conspiracy theories, disinformation and extreme views flourish. Detection and mitigation of fake news is one of the fundamental problems of our times and has attracted widespread attention. While fact checking websites such as snopes, politifact and major companies such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter have taken preliminary steps towards addressing fake news, much more remains to be done. As an interdisciplinary topic, various facets of fake news have been studied by communities as diverse as machine learning, databases, journalism, political science and many more. The objective of this tutorial is two-fold. First, we wish to familiarize the database community with the efforts by other communities on combating fake news. We provide a panoramic view of the state-of-the-art of research on various aspects including detection, propagation, mitigation, and intervention of fake news. Next, we provide a concise and intuitive summary of prior research by the database community and discuss how it could be used to counteract fake news. The tutorial covers research from areas such as data integration, truth discovery and fusion, probabilistic databases, knowledge graphs and crowdsourcing from the lens of fake news. Effective tools for addressing fake news could only be built by leveraging the synergistic relationship between database and other research communities. We hope that our tutorial provides an impetus towards such synthesis of ideas and the creation of new ones.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".