Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

COVID-Fact: Fact Extraction and Verification of Real-World Claims on COVID-19 Pandemic

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2106.03794 v1 pith:VVHKDBXO submitted 2021-06-07 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords claimsevidencecovid-19covid-factcontainsdatasetdetectinggeneral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

We introduce a FEVER-like dataset COVID-Fact of $4,086$ claims concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. The dataset contains claims, evidence for the claims, and contradictory claims refuted by the evidence. Unlike previous approaches, we automatically detect true claims and their source articles and then generate counter-claims using automatic methods rather than employing human annotators. Along with our constructed resource, we formally present the task of identifying relevant evidence for the claims and verifying whether the evidence refutes or supports a given claim. In addition to scientific claims, our data contains simplified general claims from media sources, making it better suited for detecting general misinformation regarding COVID-19. Our experiments indicate that COVID-Fact will provide a challenging testbed for the development of new systems and our approach will reduce the costs of building domain-specific datasets for detecting misinformation.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. ClimateViz: A Benchmark for Statistical Reasoning and Fact Verification on Scientific Charts

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A large-scale benchmark shows that leading multimodal language models still underperform expert humans at verifying climate claims from scientific charts.

Pith tools