MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387968110 · doi:10.1145/3581783.3612183

ECENet: Explainable and Context-Enhanced Network for Muti-modal Fact verification

2023· article· en· W4387968110 on OpenAlexaff
Fanrui Zhang, Jiawei Liu, Qiang Zhang, Esther Sun, Jingyi Xie, Zheng-Jun Zha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceModalInferenceContext (archaeology)Reinforcement learningFeature (linguistics)SentenceArtificial intelligenceProcess (computing)Feature extractionMachine learningNatural language processingProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, falsified claims incorporating both text and images have been disseminated more effectively than those containing text alone, raising significant concerns for multi-modal fact verification. Existing research makes contributions to multi-modal feature extraction and interaction, but fails to fully utilize and enhance the valuable and intricate semantic relationships between distinct features. Moreover, most detectors merely provide a single outcome judgment and lack an inference process or explanation. Taking these factors into account, we propose a novel Explainable and Context-Enhanced Network (ECENet) for multi-modal fact verification, making the first attempt to integrate multi-clue feature extraction, multi-level feature reasoning, and justification (explanation) generation within a unified framework. Specifically, we propose an Improved Coarse- and Fine-grained Attention Network, equipped with two types of level-grained attention mechanisms, to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of contextual information. Furthermore, we propose a novel justification generation module via deep reinforcement learning that does not require additional labels. In this module, a sentence extractor agent measures the importance between the query claim and all document sentences at each time step, selecting a suitable amount of high-scoring sentences to be rewritten as the explanation of the model. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207