RPf-GCNs: reciprocal perspective driven fused GCNs for rumor detection on social media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The earliest detection of rumors across social media is the need to the hour in present global village. User’s are seamlessly connected in an unstructured network leading to rapid flow of information. User’s on the social media with malign intents may share defamatory content to contribute towards the fifth generation media warfare. The ingress of such defamatory content into society can result in panic, uncertainty and demoralization the peoples. Due to the huge amount of content over social platforms, the detection of malicious contents is hard. Earlier research while focuses on content profiling and flow of information, however, the reciprocal perspective of the source and following contents is missing. In this research, a novel Reciprocal Perspective fused Graph Convolutional Neural Network (RPf-GCN) is proposed. The proposed framework incorporates twin GCNs to encode both the bottom-up and top-down perspectives, enhancing the understanding of rumor propagation. Moreover convolutional operation is employed to fuse reciprocal perspective, providing a holistic view of the conversations. To validate the efficacy of the proposed framework, we conducted a series of experiments using real-world datasets, including PHEME and SemEval. Experimentation performed illustrates that the proposed framework outperformed over various baselines in two different evaluation metrics namely Macro F1 (for PHEME 0.736, for SemEval 0.461) and Accuracy (for PHEME 0.748, for SemEval 0.658).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".