Fact-checkers want automated fact-checking explanations that trace the reasoning path, cite checkable evidence, and clearly flag uncertainty and information gaps, not just confidence scores.
Explainable Fact Checking with Probabilistic Answer Set Programming
1 Pith paper cite this work, alongside 1 external citations. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
One challenge in fact checking is the ability to improve the transparency of the decision. We present a fact checking method that uses reference information in knowledge graphs (KGs) to assess claims and explain its decisions. KGs contain a formal representation of knowledge with semantic descriptions of entities and their relationships. We exploit such rich semantics to produce interpretable explanations for the fact checking output. As information in a KG is inevitably incomplete, we rely on logical rule discovery and on Web text mining to gather the evidence to assess a given claim. Uncertain rules and facts are turned into logical programs and the checking task is modeled as an inference problem in a probabilistic extension of answer set programs. Experiments show that the probabilistic inference enables the efficient labeling of claims with interpretable explanations, and the quality of the results is higher than state of the art baselines.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.HC 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
background 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Show Me the Work: Fact-Checkers' Requirements for Explainable Automated Fact-Checking
Fact-checkers want automated fact-checking explanations that trace the reasoning path, cite checkable evidence, and clearly flag uncertainty and information gaps, not just confidence scores.