Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 58 references

MPPFND: A Dataset and Analysis of Detecting Fake News with Multi-Platform Propagation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Tracking a claim across YouTube, X, and Reddit improves automated fake news detection.

desk verdict A genuinely new multi-platform propagation dataset with useful platform analyses, but the central claim about cross-platform modeling is not yet supported by the experiments. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.15834 v1 pith:SMVWBZ4N submitted 2025-05-16 cs.SI cs.AI

Congyuan Zhao , Lingwei Wei , Ziming Qin , Wei Zhou , Yunya Song , Songlin Hu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.SIcs.AI
keywords fakenewsdetectionmulti-platformpropagationgraphneuralnetworksplatform-adaptivemodelsocialmediadatasetcontrastivelearningMPPFND
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that fake news detection improves when propagation is tracked across several social platforms at once, rather than on one platform or from text alone. To support that claim, the authors build MPPFND, a dataset of more than 3,500 fact-checked claims with 440,000+ user engagements across YouTube, X, and Reddit, and show that engagement, comment length, sentiment, and echo-chamber behavior differ by platform. They then propose APSL, a graph-neural-network model that learns a separate propagation representation for each platform and combines them under the guidance of the claim text. On this benchmark, APSL reaches F1 0.7045, above the best baseline at 0.6821, and ablations show that removing any one platform or platform-specific component lowers performance.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the Adaptive Propagation Structure Learning Network (APSL), applied to MPPFND's per-platform propagation graphs. APSL gives each platform its own graph neural network and a learnable platform vector $p_k$ that reweights comment embeddings, so structural and textual signals are not treated as if all platforms behave alike; a claim-guided attention module then fuses the platform representations, and a contrastive loss pulls together propagation features of same-label claims within each platform. The separate-GNN-plus-platform-adapter design is what lets the model turn cross-platform differences into a detection advantage.

What would settle it

Take a random sample of MPPFND claims, run independent searches on YouTube, X, and Reddit using both exact headlines and paraphrases, and compare the recovered posts with what the dataset contains; if a substantial share of engagements is missing or belongs to different stories, the propagation graphs and the reported APSL advantage rest on incomplete retrieval. A second check would rerun the detection comparison after adding the missed posts and see whether the multi-platform gain shrinks.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the same news claim generates measurably different social context across platforms, and that exploiting those differences helps separate fake from true news. On MPPFND, fake news gets more engagement on YouTube and X than on Reddit, spreads across more platforms than true news, draws shorter comments on X and YouTube but not on Reddit, and evokes sentiment patterns that are informative on X and Reddit but nearly absent on YouTube. The authors build these observations into APSL, which trains a separate graph encoder per platform, adapts comment representations with platform-specific vectors, uses an attention mechanism to select propagation features relevant to the claim, and adds a platform-aware contrastive loss. This model reaches F1 0.7045, compared with 0.6821 for the strongest baseline, and ablations show that removing platform-specific components or any single platform degrades accuracy.

Load-bearing premise

The dataset assumes that searching each platform by the claim's headline recovers the claim's real propagation structure; posts the search misses, or unrelated posts it pulls in, would distort every graph, platform analysis, and model trained on MPPFND.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On MPPFND, a multi-platform propagation model beats content-only and single-platform models; APSL's F1 is 0.7045 versus 0.6821 for the best baseline and 0.6629 for a text-only content model.
  • Every platform contributes: removing any one platform's propagation lowers F1, and the largest drop comes from removing YouTube, whose propagation graphs dominate the dataset in node count.
  • Platforms are not interchangeable evidence sources: engagement separates fake and true claims on YouTube and X but not Reddit, while sentiment separates them on X and Reddit but barely on YouTube.
  • Fake claims tend to appear on more platforms than true claims, so multi-platform presence is itself a signal that detectors can exploit.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension not pursued in the paper: train APSL on two platforms and see whether its learned platform vectors let it adapt to a third platform without retraining, which would test how transferable platform adapters are.
  • Because the dataset was built by searching each platform with the claim headline, its coverage is bounded by search recall; benchmarking MPPFND against paraphrased-headline variants would show how much propagation is missed, especially on short-text platforms.
  • The observed imbalance, where fake claims spread across more platforms than true claims, could be turned into an explicit prior feature for detection rather than only a pattern learned implicitly by a graph encoder.
  • One could treat each platform's comment activity as a separate weak label source and use cross-platform agreement as a confidence score for early detection, before a full propagation tree has formed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents MPPFND, a fake-news detection dataset that links fact-checked claims from PolitiFact and Snopes to propagation graphs and user engagements on YouTube, X, and Reddit. The dataset contains 4,965 samples over 3,500+ claims and 440,000+ engagements. The authors analyze comment length, emotion, entity references, and graph statistics across platforms, reporting platform-specific and platform-shared patterns. They then propose APSL, which applies per-platform text adapters, per-platform GNN encoders, attention-based fusion guided by the claim text, and a platform-aware contrastive loss. Experiments compare APSL with content and propagation baselines on the new dataset, and ablations in Tables 4 and 5 are used to argue that multi-platform propagation and platform-adaptive modeling improve detection.

Significance. The dataset is a plausible contribution: it is among the first English multi-platform propagation datasets linking fact-checked claims to three major platforms, and the authors release data and code. The descriptive analyses of comment style, emotion, and entities are useful if the collection procedure is validated. The main claim, that accounting for cross-platform propagation differences improves fake-news detection, is not yet established because the supporting comparison in Table 5 is confounded and the principal results lack uncertainty quantification. If the matched experiments requested below confirm the effect, this would be a solid dataset-plus-method contribution; at present the central claim is defensible but unproven.

major comments (4)
  1. [Effect of Modeling Propagation across Different Platforms (Table 5)] The claimed benefit of multi-platform propagation is not isolated from data quantity or claim coverage. The single-platform rows are evaluated only on claims that have posts on that platform, while the all-platform row uses the full claim set, and the paper itself notes that degradation is largest 'when large amounts of propagation data are missing.' Consequently the ordering in Table 5 may simply track the amount of training data per condition rather than the value of platform-adaptive modeling. I ask the authors to add a matched control that trains a single, non-platform-specific GNN on all propagation graphs pooled across platforms, with the same total data, parameter count, and training budget as APSL. In addition, report the per-condition number of claims, samples, and graph nodes, and rerun the comparison on the subset of claims that appear on all three platforms.
  2. [Experimental Setups] The random 7:1:2 split is described over '4965 data samples,' but the unit of splitting is not stated. If the unit is a claim-platform sample rather than a claim, the same claim can appear in both training and test through its posts on different platforms, inflating the reported numbers and obscuring the comparison. Please specify whether the split is by claim or by sample; if the split is by sample, provide a claim-level split version and report the number of claims in each partition.
  3. [Main Results (Table 3)] The headline comparisons are averages of three runs with no variance or significance tests. For the BERT backbone, APSL F1 is 0.7045 versus UPFD-SAGE at 0.6821, a gap that may be real but is not assessable from three averaged runs. Please report mean and standard deviation (or individual runs) and run paired significance tests across repeated seeds for the key comparisons in Tables 3, 4, and 5.
  4. [Dataset Construction / Data Collection] The collection procedure is underspecified: 'we create search queries based on the headlines to retrieve posts' does not state how queries were matched, how non-exact or duplicate posts were handled, or how retrieval quality was validated. Because every graph, statistic, and model input depends on the completeness and precision of headline search, please provide the matching rules, include retrieval statistics (for example, posts retrieved per claim and a manual verification sample), and discuss limitations due to API availability and platform search bias.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 1] The row for MPPFND contains the garbled entry 'X\Youtube\Reddit' and should be cleaned up to list the three platform names consistently.
  2. [Equation (2)] The typesetting of Equation (2) is ambiguous: the attention weight appears to include h_k^g both inside and outside the Softmax, and the role of the claim text c is not clear. Please define the query, key, and value explicitly and state the dimension d.
  3. [References] The reference list contains entries that do not appear to be cited in the body, including Chalnick and Billman (1988), Feigenbaum (1963), Hill (1983), Matlock (2001), Newell and Simon (1972), Ohlsson and Langley (1985), and Shrager and Langley (1990); these should be removed or cited.
  4. [Baselines and Tables] The text mentions 'gpt-4o-mini' as a baseline, but Table 3 lists 'GPT-4o'; please clarify which model was actually evaluated.
  5. [Analysis of Comment Emotion and Echo Chambers] The claim that Reddit exhibits a stronger echo chamber effect is based on comment-to-claim similarity, which is not a standard echo chamber measure; please justify this operationalization or use an established metric.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claim is tested against held-out labels and external baselines, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

This is an empirical engineering paper rather than a derivation chain, and I found no step in which a claimed result reduces by construction to its inputs. The dataset labels come from external fact-checkers (PolitiFact and Snopes), not from the model, and the central comparison in Table 3 evaluates APSL against content-based and propagation-based baselines on a held-out test set. The ablation studies in Tables 4 and 5 remove components or platforms and measure degradation, so the multi-platform claim is not true by definition of the model. The single-platform vs all-platform comparison in Table 5 does have experimental confounds: the conditions use different claim subsets and different amounts of propagation data, and the paper itself notes degradation is largest when large amounts of propagation data are missing. That is a validity concern about the evidence, not circularity, because the result is not manufactured by equation identity or by fitting a parameter and then predicting it. Self-citations such as Wei et al. (2021), Wei et al. (2022), and Hu et al. (2021) appear as related work and baselines; they are not invoked as the sole justification for the main claim, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from prior work by the same authors. Under the rubric, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the reliability of fact-checker labels, the completeness of headline-based search retrieval, the correctness of the propagation graph construction, and the validity of the train/test split. No new physical or conceptual entities are introduced; the platform embedding is a learned parameter, not a new entity.

free parameters (4)
  • gamma (contrastive loss weight) = 0.3
    Chosen by hand to balance L_pred and L_PCL in Eq. 5; affects final performance.
  • tau (contrastive temperature) = 0.1
    Set by hand in Implementations; controls sharpness of the contrastive similarity distribution.
  • platform embedding p_k = learned vector per platform
    Learnable vector in Eq. 1 that adapts comment embeddings to each platform; fitted during training.
  • network weights W_k, b_k, W_d, b_d, GNN parameters = learned during training
    All neural network parameters are fitted to the training set; standard in empirical ML papers but technically free parameters of the model.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Fact-checking labels from PolitiFact and Snopes are accurate, and the binary mapping preserves truthfulness.
    Ground truth for the dataset comes from expert annotations accepted without independent verification; the mapping in Label Mapping Strategy treats 'mostly-true' and 'half-true' inconsistently between the two sources.
  • domain assumption Headline-based search on each platform recovers the claim's propagation structure.
    Dataset Construction relies on search queries to retrieve posts; the completeness and relevance of search results are not measured.
  • domain assumption Edges built from repost and comment relationships represent propagation.
    Graph Construction says edges are based on 'relationships between reposts and comments' but the exact rule is not specified; if the rule is wrong, the GNNs learn incorrect structure.
  • domain assumption The random split does not leak the same claim across train and test.
    Implementations describe a 7:1:2 random split but do not state the unit; with multiple platform samples per claim, leakage is possible.
  • standard math Standard neural network training assumptions hold: samples are i.i.d. and the supervised loss is appropriate.
    The model relies on conventional supervised learning assumptions; no unusual math is introduced.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MPPFND: A Dataset and Analysis of Detecting Fake News with Multi-Platform Propagation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SMVWBZ4N

@misc{pith2026250515834,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MPPFND: A Dataset and Analysis of Detecting Fake News with Multi-Platform Propagation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SMVWBZ4N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.15834}
}
read the original abstract

Fake news spreads widely on social media, leading to numerous negative effects. Most existing detection algorithms focus on analyzing news content and social context to detect fake news. However, these approaches typically detect fake news based on specific platforms, ignoring differences in propagation characteristics across platforms. In this paper, we introduce the MPPFND dataset, which captures propagation structures across multiple platforms. We also describe the commenting and propagation characteristics of different platforms to show that their social contexts have distinct features. We propose a multi-platform fake news detection model (APSL) that uses graph neural networks to extract social context features from various platforms. Experiments show that accounting for cross-platform propagation differences improves fake news detection performance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.15834 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An example of real-world news spreading across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Comment similarity, (b) Comment length, (c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Emotion feature of each social platform comment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Overview of the proposed framework APSL. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline " cite write " FUNCTION editor.postfix editor num.names #1 > "( )" "( )" if FUNCTION editor.trans.postfix editor num.names #1 > "( )" "( )" if FUNCTION trans.postfix translator num.names #1 > "( )" "( )" if FUNCTION authors.editors.reflist.apa5 'field := 'dot := field num.names 'numnames := numnames 'format.num.names := format.num.names na...

  2. [2]

    , Amri, S

    intro_1.2 APACrefauthors A \" meur, E. , Amri, S. \ Brassard, G. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review . Social Network Analysis and Mining 13 1 30

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    , Bhowmik, D

    emotional_1 APACrefauthors Ajao, O. , Bhowmik, D. \ Zargari, S. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Sentiment aware fake news detection on online social networks Sentiment aware fake news detection on online social networks . ICASSP 2019-2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) Icassp 2019-2019 ieee international conferen...

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    , Cheng, L

    echo APACrefauthors Alatawi, F. , Cheng, L. , Tahir, A. , Karami, M. , Jiang, B. , Black, T. \ Liu, H. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . A survey on echo chambers on social media: Description, detection and mitigation A survey on echo chambers on social media: Description, detection and mitigation . arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.05084

    arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    , Xiao, X

    bigcn APACrefauthors Bian, T. , Xiao, X. , Xu, T. , Zhao, P. , Huang, W. , Rong, Y. \ Huang, J. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Rumor detection on social media with bi-directional graph convolutional networks Rumor detection on social media with bi-directional graph convolutional networks . Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence Proceedings...

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    \ Billman, D

    ChalnickBillman1988a APACrefauthors Chalnick, A. \ Billman, D. APACrefauthors \ 1988 . Unsupervised learning of correlational structure Unsupervised learning of correlational structure . Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society Proceedings of the tenth annual conference of the cognitive science society \ ( \ 510--516). H...

    1988

  7. [7]

    , Kornblith, S

    con_2 APACrefauthors Chen, T. , Kornblith, S. , Norouzi, M. \ Hinton, G. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations A simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations . International conference on machine learning International conference on machine learning \ ( \ 1597--1607)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    acl_content_1 APACrefauthors Chen, Z. , Hu, L. , Li, W. , Shao, Y. \ Nie, L. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Causal intervention and counterfactual reasoning for multi-modal fake news detection Causal intervention and counterfactual reasoning for multi-modal fake news detection . Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguist...

    work page 2023

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    , Van Merri \"e nboer, B

    gru APACrefauthors Cho, K. , Van Merri \"e nboer, B. , Gulcehre, C. , Bahdanau, D. , Bougares, F. , Schwenk, H. \ Bengio, Y. APACrefauthors \ 2014 . Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation Learning phrase representations us...

    2014 arXiv

  2. [10]

    \ Arora, A

    linguistic_1 APACrefauthors Choudhary, A. \ Arora, A. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Linguistic feature based learning model for fake news detection and classification Linguistic feature based learning model for fake news detection and classification . Expert Systems with Application...

    2021

  3. [11]

    \ Jia, C

    propagation_GNN_RAGCL APACrefauthors Cui, C. \ Jia, C. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Propagation Tree Is Not Deep: Adaptive Graph Contrastive Learning Approach for Rumor Detection Propagation tree is not deep: Adaptive graph contrastive learning approach for rumor detection . Procee...

    2024

  4. [12]

    , Chang, M W

    bert APACrefauthors Devlin, J. , Chang, M W. , Lee, K. \ Toutanova, K. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding . arXiv preprint arX...

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    , Shu, K

    propagation_GNN_upfd_2021 APACrefauthors Dou, Y. , Shu, K. , Xia, C. , Yu, P S. \ Sun, L. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . User preference-aware fake news detection User preference-aware fake news detection . Proceedings of the 44th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and de...

    2021

  6. [14]

    APACrefauthors \ 1963

    Feigenbaum1963a APACrefauthors Feigenbaum, E A. APACrefauthors \ 1963 . The simulation of verbal learning behavior The simulation of verbal learning behavior . E A. Feigenbaum\ J. Feldman\ ( ), Computers and thought. Computers and thought. New York McGraw-Hill

    1963

  7. [15]

    , Rosso, P

    emotional_2 APACrefauthors Giachanou, A. , Rosso, P. \ Crestani, F. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Leveraging emotional signals for credibility detection Leveraging emotional signals for credibility detection . Proceedings of the 42nd international ACM SIGIR conference on research an...

    2019

  8. [16]

    , Fan, H

    con_1 APACrefauthors He, K. , Fan, H. , Wu, Y. , Xie, S. \ Girshick, R. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning . Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on compu...

    2020

  9. [17]

    APACrefauthors \ 1983

    Hill1983a APACrefauthors Hill, J A C. APACrefauthors \ 1983 . A computational model of language acquisition in the two-year old A computational model of language acquisition in the two-year old . Cognition and Brain Theory 6 287--317

    1983

  10. [18]

    , Wei, L

    dou2021rumor APACrefauthors Hu, D. , Wei, L. , Zhou, W. \ . APACrefauthors \ 2021 . A Rumor Detection Approach Based on Multi-Relational Propagation Tree A rumor detection approach based on multi-relational propagation tree . Journal of Computer Research and Development 58 7 1...

    2021

  11. [19]

    , Guo, Z

    dataset_evi&multimodal_mr2 APACrefauthors Hu, X. , Guo, Z. , Chen, J. , Wen, L. \ Yu, P S. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Mr2: A benchmark for multimodal retrieval-augmented rumor detection in social media Mr2: A benchmark for multimodal retrieval-augmented rumor detection in social ...

    2023

  12. [20]

    , McKeown, K

    acl_content_2 APACrefauthors Huang, K H. , McKeown, K. , Nakov, P. , Choi, Y. \ Ji, H. APACrefauthors \ 2023 07 . Faking Fake News for Real Fake News Detection: Propaganda-Loaded Training Data Generation Faking fake news for real fake news detection: Propaganda-loaded training...

    2023

  13. [21]

    , Bordia, S

    dataset_evi_HOVER APACrefauthors Jiang, Y. , Bordia, S. , Zhong, Z. , Dognin, C. , Singh, M. \ Bansal, M. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . HoVer: A dataset for many-hop fact extraction and claim verification Hover: A dataset for many-hop fact extraction and claim verification . arXiv p...

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    , Cao, J

    weibo16 APACrefauthors Jin, Z. , Cao, J. , Guo, H. , Zhang, Y. \ Luo, J. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Multimodal fusion with recurrent neural networks for rumor detection on microblogs Multimodal fusion with recurrent neural networks for rumor detection on microblogs . Proceedings ...

    2017

  15. [23]

    , Cao, J

    jin2017detection APACrefauthors Jin, Z. , Cao, J. , Guo, H. , Zhang, Y. , Wang, Y. \ Luo, J. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Detection and analysis of 2016 us presidential election related rumors on twitter Detection and analysis of 2016 us presidential election related rumors on twit...

    2017

  16. [24]

    , Goswami, A

    writing_style_2_FakeBERT APACrefauthors Kaliyar, R K. , Goswami, A. \ Narang, P. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . FakeBERT: Fake news detection in social media with a BERT-based deep learning approach Fakebert: Fake news detection in social media with a bert-based deep learning approac...

    2021

  17. [25]

    , Chieu, H L

    propagation_attention_PLAN APACrefauthors Khoo, L M S. , Chieu, H L. , Qian, Z. \ Jiang, J. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Interpretable rumor detection in microblogs by attending to user interactions Interpretable rumor detection in microblogs by attending to user interactions . Pro...

    2020

  18. [26]

    mcfend APACrefauthors Li, Y. , He, H. , Bai, J. \ Wen, D. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . MCFEND: a multi-source benchmark dataset for Chinese fake news detection Mcfend: a multi-source benchmark dataset for chinese fake news detection . Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2024 P...

    2024

  19. [27]

    seq_2 APACrefauthors Lin, H. , Yi, P. , Ma, J. , Jiang, H. , Luo, Z. , Shi, S. \ Liu, R. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Zero-shot rumor detection with propagation structure via prompt learning Zero-shot rumor detection with propagation structure via prompt learning . Proceedings of t...

    2023

  20. [28]

    , Ott, M

    RoBerta APACrefauthors Liu, Y. , Ott, M. , Goyal, N. , Du, J. , Joshi, M. , Chen, D. Stoyanov, V. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach . arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    \ Wu, Y F

    seq_model1 APACrefauthors Liu, Y. \ Wu, Y F. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Early detection of fake news on social media through propagation path classification with recurrent and convolutional networks Early detection of fake news on social media through propagation path classificat...

    2018

  22. [30]

    \ Li, C T

    propagation_attention_GCAN APACrefauthors Lu, Y J. \ Li, C T. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . GCAN: Graph-aware co-attention networks for explainable fake news detection on social media Gcan: Graph-aware co-attention networks for explainable fake news detection on social media . arXiv...

    2020 arXiv

  23. [31]

    , Lin, D

    ma2017content APACrefauthors Ma, B. , Lin, D. \ Cao, D. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Content representation for microblog rumor detection Content representation for microblog rumor detection . Advances in Computational Intelligence Systems: Contributions Presented at the 16th UK Wo...

    2017

  24. [32]

    , Gao, W

    twitter16 APACrefauthors Ma, J. , Gao, W. , Mitra, P. , Kwon, S. , Jansen, B J. , Wong, K F. \ Cha, M. APACrefauthors \ 2016 . Detecting rumors from microblogs with recurrent neural networks Detecting rumors from microblogs with recurrent neural networks

    2016

  25. [33]

    , Luo, M

    acl_content_3 APACrefauthors Ma, Z. , Luo, M. , Guo, H. , Zeng, Z. , Hao, Y. \ Zhao, X. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Event-radar: Event-driven multi-view learning for multimodal fake news detection Event-radar: Event-driven multi-view learning for multimodal fake news detection . P...

    2024

  26. [34]

    APACrefauthors \ 2001

    Matlock2001 APACrefauthors Matlock, T. APACrefauthors \ 2001 . How real is fictive motion? How real is fictive motion? Doctoral dissertation, Psychology Department, University of California, Santa Cruz

    2001

  27. [35]

    , Pacheco, M L

    acl_propagation_1 APACrefauthors Mehta, N. , Pacheco, M L. \ Goldwasser, D. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Tackling fake news detection by continually improving social context representations using graph neural networks Tackling fake news detection by continually improving social con...

    2022

  28. [36]

    , Cao, J

    domain_2_MDFEND APACrefauthors Nan, Q. , Cao, J. , Zhu, Y. , Wang, Y. \ Li, J. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . MDFEND: Multi-domain fake news detection Mdfend: Multi-domain fake news detection . Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management...

    2021

  29. [37]

    \ Simon, H A

    NewellSimon1972a APACrefauthors Newell, A. \ Simon, H A. APACrefauthors \ 1972 . Human problem solving Human problem solving . Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice-Hall

    1972

  30. [38]

    , Horne, B D

    dataset_textonly_NELA-GT-2018 APACrefauthors N rregaard, J. , Horne, B D. \ Adal , S. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . NELA-GT-2018: A large multi-labelled news dataset for the study of misinformation in news articles Nela-gt-2018: A large multi-labelled news dataset for the study of m...

    2018

  31. [39]

    \ Langley, P

    OhlssonLangley1985a APACrefauthors Ohlsson, S. \ Langley, P. APACrefauthors \ 1985 . Identifying solution paths in cognitive diagnosis Identifying solution paths in cognitive diagnosis \ \ \ CMU-RI-TR-85-2 . Pittsburgh, PA Carnegie Mellon University, The Robotics Institute

    1985

  32. [40]

    , Cannon, T D

    fake_news_defination APACrefauthors Pennycook, G. , Cannon, T D. \ Rand, D G. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Journal of experimental psychology: general 147 12 1865

    2018

  33. [41]

    \ Jia, C

    seq_att APACrefauthors Ran, H. \ Jia, C. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . Unsupervised cross-domain rumor detection with contrastive learning and cross-attention Unsupervised cross-domain rumor detection with contrastive learning and cross-attention . Proceedings of the AAAI Conference...

    2023

  34. [42]

    , de Moura, G A

    intro_1.3 APACrefauthors Rocha, Y M. , de Moura, G A. , Desid \'e rio, G A. , de Oliveira, C H. , Louren c o, F D. \ de Figueiredo Nicolete, L D. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . The impact of fake news on social media and its influence on health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systema...

    2021

  35. [43]

    , Cao, J

    acl_propagation_2 APACrefauthors Sheng, Q. , Cao, J. , Zhang, X. , Li, R. , Wang, D. \ Zhu, Y. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Zoom out and observe: News environment perception for fake news detection Zoom out and observe: News environment perception for fake news detection . arXiv pr...

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    \ Langley, P

    ShragerLangley1990a APACrefauthors Shrager, J. \ Langley, P. APACrefauthors \ ( ). \ 1990 . Computational models of scientific discovery and theory formation Computational models of scientific discovery and theory formation . San Mateo, CA Morgan Kaufmann

    1990

  37. [45]

    , Mahudeswaran, D

    fakenewsnet APACrefauthors Shu, K. , Mahudeswaran, D. , Wang, S. , Lee, D. \ Liu, H. APACrefauthors \ 2020 . Fakenewsnet: A data repository with news content, social context, and spatiotemporal information for studying fake news on social media Fakenewsnet: A data repository w...

    2020

  38. [46]

    , Luo, L

    domain_1 APACrefauthors Silva, A. , Luo, L. , Karunasekera, S. \ Leckie, C. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Embracing domain differences in fake news: Cross-domain fake news detection using multi-modal data Embracing domain differences in fake news: Cross-domain fake news detection us...

    2021

  39. [47]

    , Zhang, X J

    propagation_GNN_duck_2022 APACrefauthors Tian, L. , Zhang, X J. \ Lau, J H. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Duck: Rumour detection on social media by modelling user and comment propagation networks Duck: Rumour detection on social media by modelling user and comment propagation networ...

    2022

  40. [48]

    , Shazeer, N

    transformer APACrefauthors Vaswani, A. , Shazeer, N. , Parmar, N. , Uszkoreit, J. , Jones, L. , Gomez, A N. Polosukhin, I. APACrefauthors \ 2017 . Attention is all you need Attention is all you need . Advances in neural information processing systems 30

    2017

  41. [49]

    , Van Noort, G

    intro_1.4 APACrefauthors Voorveld, H A. , Van Noort, G. , Muntinga, D G. \ Bronner, F. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Engagement with social media and social media advertising: The differentiating role of platform type Engagement with social media and social media advertising: The di...

    2018

  42. [50]

    eann APACrefauthors Wang, Y. , Ma, F. , Jin, Z. , Yuan, Y. , Xun, G. , Jha, K. Gao, J. APACrefauthors \ 2018 . Eann: Event adversarial neural networks for multi-modal fake news detection Eann: Event adversarial neural networks for multi-modal fake news detection . Proceedings ...

    2018

  43. [51]

    upsr APACrefauthors Wei, L. , Hu, D. , Zhou, W. \ Hu, S. APACrefauthors \ 2022 . Uncertainty-aware propagation structure reconstruction for fake news detection Uncertainty-aware propagation structure reconstruction for fake news detection . Proceedings of the 29th Internationa...

    2022

  44. [52]

    DBLP:conf/acl/WeiHZYH20 APACrefauthors Wei, L. , Hu, D. , Zhou, W. \ . APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Towards Propagation Uncertainty: Edge-enhanced Bayesian Graph Convolutional Networks for Rumor Detection Towards propagation uncertainty: Edge-enhanced bayesian graph convolutional n...

    2021

  45. [53]

    , Shah, A

    dataset_evi&multimodal_mocheg APACrefauthors Yao, B M. , Shah, A. , Sun, L. , Cho, J H. \ Huang, L. APACrefauthors \ 2023 . End-to-end multimodal fact-checking and explanation generation: A challenging dataset and models End-to-end multimodal fact-checking and explanation gene...

    2023

  46. [54]

    , Zhu, P

    propagation_GNN_GAMC APACrefauthors Yin, S. , Zhu, P. , Wu, L. , Gao, C. \ Wang, Z. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . GAMC: an unsupervised method for fake news detection using graph autoencoder with masking Gamc: an unsupervised method for fake news detection using graph autoencoder wi...

    2024

  47. [55]

    , Liu, Q

    writing_style_1 APACrefauthors Yu, F. , Liu, Q. , Wu, S. , Wang, L. , Tan, T. \ . APACrefauthors \ 2017 . A Convolutional Approach for Misinformation Identification. A convolutional approach for misinformation identification. IJCAI Ijcai \ ( \ 3901--3907)

    2017

  48. [56]

    , Holtzman, A

    dataset_textonly_realnews APACrefauthors Zellers, R. , Holtzman, A. , Rashkin, H. , Bisk, Y. , Farhadi, A. , Roesner, F. \ Choi, Y. APACrefauthors \ 2019 . Defending against neural fake news Defending against neural fake news . Advances in neural information processing systems 32

    2019

  49. [57]

    , Cao, J

    emotional_3 APACrefauthors Zhang, X. , Cao, J. , Li, X. , Sheng, Q. , Zhong, L. \ Shu, K. APACrefauthors \ 2021 . Mining dual emotion for fake news detection Mining dual emotion for fake news detection . Proceedings of the web conference 2021 Proceedings of the web conference ...

    2021

  50. [58]

    , Zhou, J

    acl_propagation_3 APACrefauthors Zong, L. , Zhou, J. , Lin, W. , Liu, X. , Zhang, X. \ Xu, B. APACrefauthors \ 2024 . Unveiling opinion evolution via prompting and diffusion for short video fake news detection Unveiling opinion evolution via prompting and diffusion for short v...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.