REVIEW 1 cited by
Can Deception Detection Go Deeper? Dataset, Evaluation, and Benchmark for Deception Reasoning
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
Can Deception Detection Go Deeper? Dataset, Evaluation, and Benchmark for Deception Reasoning
read the original abstract
Deception detection has attracted increasing attention due to its importance in real-world scenarios. Its main goal is to detect deceptive behaviors from multimodal clues such as gestures, facial expressions, prosody, etc. However, these bases are usually subjective and related to personal habits. Therefore, we extend deception detection to deception reasoning, further providing objective evidence to support subjective judgment. Specifically, we provide potential lies and basic facts and then analyze why this sentence may be a lie by combining factual inconsistencies and intent behind them. Compared with deception detection, this task is more applicable to real-world scenarios. For example, in interrogation, the police should judge whether a person is lying based on solid evidence. This paper presents our initial attempts at this task, including constructing a dataset and defining evaluation metrics. Meanwhile, this task can serve as a benchmark for evaluating the complex reasoning capability of large language models. Our code and data are provided in the supplementary material.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Semantics of Subterfuge: Benchmarking Legal Deception Detection Against General-domain State-of-the-Art
On deception detection benchmarks, fine-tuned transformers beat LLMs on data-rich datasets, few-shot GPT-4o wins the small legal corpus, and chain-of-thought prompting frequently reduces F1.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.