BILE: An Effective Behavior-based Latent Exploration Scheme for Deep Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current approaches for fake news detection are mainly devoted to extracting candidate evidence from comments (or external articles) and establishing interactive reasoning with the news itself to verify the falsehood of the news. However, they still have several drawbacks: 1) The interaction object is coarse-grained, which mainly drives the entire news to participate in interaction, but ignores the learning of potential suspicious segments in news; 2) The reasoning ways are relatively single, making it difficult to explore the various possible correlations between news and candidate evidence. To this end, we propose Unified Evidence Enhancement Inference framework (UEEI) to discover and infer high-quality evidence to reveal the false parts of news for detection. Specifically, UEEI first promotes the interaction fusion between comments and news from the perspectives of semantic and emotion, thereby learning potential suspicious fragments in news. Then, the model constructs entity-level and relationship-level retrievals to screen sufficient candidate evidence from external sources. Finally, we measure coherence between suspicious fragments and candidate evidence by multi-view reasoning, and further infer explainable evidence that discovers the false parts of news. Experiments on three public datasets confirm the effectiveness and interpretability of our UEEI.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".