An entity matching-based image topic verification framework for online fact-checking
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 last decade has witnessed an unprecedented growth in online multimedia data. However, the manipulated and fake images have created fertile grounds for sowing online fake news. Consequently, online fact-checking has drawn more attention from academia and industry to detect and mitigate online fake news. Nevertheless, most of the online fact-checking task focus on textual content. Although multimedia information like images can provide promising potentials for identifying misinformation, it has not been adequately studied. Besides, traditional information retrieval techniques, e.g., image caption generation, typically lack high-quality training data or their computation costs are very high. Aiming to address the above issues, we proposed an image topic verification framework based on named entity matching. Particularly, the proposed framework can effectively check if a targeted image is related to a specific topic or not. In addition, it can also retrieve helpful contextual background and knowledge about the targeted image. We conduct extensive experiments and analyses. The results validate the effectiveness and practicality of our framework.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it