MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploring Decomposition for Table-based Fact Verification

2021· preprint· en· W3198948523 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)DecompositionTable (database)ParsingSimple (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceProgramming languageNatural languageMachine learningFormal verificationNatural language processingTheoretical computer scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fact verification based on structured data is challenging as it requires models to understand both natural language and symbolic operations performed over tables. Although pretrained language models have demonstrated a strong capability in verifying simple statements, they struggle with complex statements that involve multiple operations. In this paper, we improve fact verification by decomposing complex statements into simpler subproblems. Leveraging the programs synthesized by a weakly supervised semantic parser, we propose a program-guided approach to constructing a pseudo dataset for decomposition model training. The subproblems, together with their predicted answers, serve as the intermediate evidence to enhance our fact verification model. Experiments show that our proposed approach achieves the new state-of-theart performance, an 82.7% accuracy, on the TABFACT benchmark.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.219
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.100 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207