Detecting COVID-19-Related Fake News Using Feature Extraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since its emergence in December 2019, there have been numerous posts and news regarding the COVID-19 pandemic in social media, traditional print, and electronic media. These sources have information from both trusted and non-trusted medical sources. Furthermore, the news from these media are spread rapidly. Spreading a piece of deceptive information may lead to anxiety, unwanted exposure to medical remedies, tricks for digital marketing, and may lead to deadly factors. Therefore, a model for detecting fake news from the news pool is essential. In this work, the dataset which is a fusion of news related to COVID-19 that has been sourced from data from several social media and news sources is used for classification. In the first step, preprocessing is performed on the dataset to remove unwanted text, then tokenization is carried out to extract the tokens from the raw text data collected from various sources. Later, feature selection is performed to avoid the computational overhead incurred in processing all the features in the dataset. The linguistic and sentiment features are extracted for further processing. Finally, several state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms are trained to classify the COVID-19-related dataset. These algorithms are then evaluated using various metrics. The results show that the random forest classifier outperforms the other classifiers with an accuracy of 88.50%.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".