MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412888901 · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.fever-1.19

SANCTUARY: An Efficient Evidence-based Automated Fact Checking System

2025· article· en· W4412888901 on OpenAlexafffund
Arbaaz Dharmavaram, Saqib Hakak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing volume of misinformation online, automated fact-checking systems are becoming increasingly important.This paper presents SANCTUARY, an efficient pipeline for evidence-based verification of real-world claims.Our approach consists of three stages: Hypothetical Question & Passage Generation, a two-step Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) hybrid evidence retrieval, and structured reasoning and prediction, which leverages two lightweight Large Language Models (LLMs).On the challenging AVeriTeC benchmark, our system achieves 25.27 points on the new AVeriTeC score (Ev2R recall), outperforming the previous state-of-the-art baseline by 5 absolute points (1.25 relative improvement).Sanctuary demonstrates that careful retrieval, reasoning strategies and well-integrated language models can substantially advance automated fact-checking performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207