Vera: Prediction Techniques for Reducing Harmful Misinformation in Consumer Health Search
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about a proliferation of harmful news articles online, with sources lacking credibility and misrepresenting scientific facts. Misinformation has real consequences for consumer health search, i.e., users searching for health information. In the context of multi-stage ranking architectures, there has been little work exploring whether they prioritize correct and credible information over misinformation. We find that, indeed, training models on standard relevance ranking datasets like MS MARCO passage---which have been curated to contain mostly credible information---yields models that might also promote harmful misinformation. To rectify this, we propose a label prediction technique that can separate helpful from harmful content. Our design leverages pretrained sequence-to-sequence transformer models for both relevance ranking and label prediction. Evaluated at the TREC 2020 Health Misinformation Track, our techniques represent the top-ranked system: Our best submitted run was 19.2 points higher than the second-best run based on the primary metric, a 68% relative improvement. Additional post-hoc experiments show that we can boost effectiveness by another 3.5 points.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it