Xia Zeng

Xia Zeng, Arkaitz Zubiaga

Claim verification is an essential step in the automated fact-checking pipeline which assesses the veracity of a claim against a piece of evidence. In this work, we explore the potential of few-shot claim verification, where only very limited data is available for supervision. We propose MAPLE (Micro Analysis of Pairwise Language Evolution), a pioneering approach that explores the alignment between a claim and its evidence with a small seq2seq model and a novel semantic measure. Its innovative utilization of micro language evolution path leverages unlabelled pairwise data to facilitate claim verification while imposing low demand on data annotations and computing resources. MAPLE demonstrates significant performance improvements over SOTA baselines SEED, PET and LLaMA 2 across three fact-checking datasets: FEVER, Climate FEVER, and SciFact. Data and code are available here: https://github.com/XiaZeng0223/MAPLE

Xia Zeng, Amani S. Abumansour, Arkaitz Zubiaga

As online false information continues to grow, automated fact-checking has gained an increasing amount of attention in recent years. Researchers in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP) have contributed to the task by building fact-checking datasets, devising automated fact-checking pipelines and proposing NLP methods to further research in the development of different components. This paper reviews relevant research on automated fact-checking covering both the claim detection and claim validation components.

Xia Zeng, Arkaitz Zubiaga

Scientific claim verification is a unique challenge that is attracting increasing interest. The SCIVER shared task offers a benchmark scenario to test and compare claim verification approaches by participating teams and consists in three steps: relevant abstract selection, rationale selection and label prediction. In this paper, we present team QMUL-SDS's participation in the shared task. We propose an approach that performs scientific claim verification by doing binary classifications step-by-step. We trained a BioBERT-large classifier to select abstracts based on pairwise relevance assessments for each <claim, title of the abstract> and continued to train it to select rationales out of each retrieved abstract based on <claim, sentence>. We then propose a two-step setting for label prediction, i.e. first predicting "NOT_ENOUGH_INFO" or "ENOUGH_INFO", then label those marked as "ENOUGH_INFO" as either "SUPPORT" or "CONTRADICT". Compared to the baseline system, we achieve substantial improvements on the dev set. As a result, our team is the No. 4 team on the leaderboard.