Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2025
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.04955 |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866915142199934976 |
|---|---|
| author | Ullrich, Herbert Mlynář, Tomáš Drchal, Jan |
| author_facet | Ullrich, Herbert Mlynář, Tomáš Drchal, Jan |
| contents | In this paper, we explore the problem of Claim Extraction using one-to-many text generation methods, comparing LLMs, small summarization models finetuned for the task, and a previous NER-centric baseline QACG. As the current publications on Claim Extraction, Fact Extraction, Claim Generation and Check-worthy Claim Detection are quite scattered in their means and terminology, we compile their common objectives, releasing the FEVERFact dataset, with 17K atomic factual claims extracted from 4K contextualised Wikipedia sentences, adapted from the original FEVER. We compile the known objectives into an Evaluation framework of: Atomicity, Fluency, Decontextualization, Faithfulness checked for each generated claim separately, and Focus and Coverage measured against the full set of predicted claims for a single input. For each metric, we implement a scale using a reduction to an already-explored NLP task. We validate our metrics against human grading of generic claims, to see that the model ranking on $F_{fact}$, our hardest metric, did not change and the evaluation framework approximates human grading very closely in terms of $F_1$ and RMSE. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2502_04955 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Claim Extraction for Fact-Checking: Data, Models, and Automated Metrics Ullrich, Herbert Mlynář, Tomáš Drchal, Jan Computation and Language In this paper, we explore the problem of Claim Extraction using one-to-many text generation methods, comparing LLMs, small summarization models finetuned for the task, and a previous NER-centric baseline QACG. As the current publications on Claim Extraction, Fact Extraction, Claim Generation and Check-worthy Claim Detection are quite scattered in their means and terminology, we compile their common objectives, releasing the FEVERFact dataset, with 17K atomic factual claims extracted from 4K contextualised Wikipedia sentences, adapted from the original FEVER. We compile the known objectives into an Evaluation framework of: Atomicity, Fluency, Decontextualization, Faithfulness checked for each generated claim separately, and Focus and Coverage measured against the full set of predicted claims for a single input. For each metric, we implement a scale using a reduction to an already-explored NLP task. We validate our metrics against human grading of generic claims, to see that the model ranking on $F_{fact}$, our hardest metric, did not change and the evaluation framework approximates human grading very closely in terms of $F_1$ and RMSE. |
| title | Claim Extraction for Fact-Checking: Data, Models, and Automated Metrics |
| topic | Computation and Language |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.04955 |