Credibility analysis of textual claims with explainable evidence

Despite being a vast resource of valuable information, the Web has been polluted by the spread of false claims. Increasing hoaxes, fake news, and misleading information on the Web have given rise to many fact-checking websites that manually assess these doubtful claims. However, the rapid speed and large scale of misinformation spread have become the bottleneck for manual verification. This calls for credibility assessment tools that can automate this verification process. Prior works in this domain make strong assumptions about the structure of the claims and the communities where they are made. Most importantly, black-box techniques proposed in prior works lack the ability to explain why a certain statement is deemed credible or not. To address these limitations, this dissertation proposes a general framework for automated credibility assessment that does not make any assumption about the structure or origin of the claims. Specifically, we propose a feature-based model, which automatically retrieves relevant articles about the given claim and assesses its credibility by capturing the mutual interaction between the language style of the relevant articles, their stance towards the claim, and the trustworthiness of the underlying web sources. We further enhance our credibility assessment approach and propose a neural-network-based model. Unlike the feature-based model, this model does not rely on feature engineering and external lexicons. Both our models make their assessments interpretable by extracting explainable evidence from judiciously selected web sources. We utilize our models and develop a Web interface, CredEye, which enables users to automatically assess the credibility of a textual claim and dissect into the assessment by browsing through judiciously and automatically selected evidence snippets. In addition, we study the problem of stance classification and propose a neural-network-based model for predicting the stance of diverse user perspectives regarding the controversial claims. Given a controversial claim and a user comment, our stance classification model predicts whether the user comment is supporting or opposing the claim.Das Web ist eine riesige Quelle wertvoller Informationen, allerdings wurde es durch die Verbreitung von Falschmeldungen verschmutzt. Eine zunehmende Anzahl an Hoaxes, Falschmeldungen und irreführenden Informationen im Internet haben viele Websites hervorgebracht, auf denen die Fakten überprüft und zweifelhafte Behauptungen manuell bewertet werden. Die rasante Verbreitung großer Mengen von Fehlinformationen sind jedoch zum Engpass für die manuelle Überprüfung geworden. Dies erfordert Tools zur Bewertung der Glaubwürdigkeit, mit denen dieser Überprüfungsprozess automatisiert werden kann. In früheren Arbeiten in diesem Bereich werden starke Annahmen gemacht über die Struktur der Behauptungen und die Portale, in denen sie gepostet werden. Vor allem aber können die Black-Box-Techniken, die in früheren Arbeiten vorgeschlagen wurden, nicht erklären, warum eine bestimmte Aussage als glaubwürdig erachtet wird oder nicht. Um diesen Einschränkungen zu begegnen, wird in dieser Dissertation ein allgemeines Framework für die automatisierte Bewertung der Glaubwürdigkeit vorgeschlagen, bei dem keine Annahmen über die Struktur oder den Ursprung der Behauptungen gemacht werden. Insbesondere schlagen wir ein featurebasiertes Modell vor, das automatisch relevante Artikel zu einer bestimmten Behauptung abruft und deren Glaubwürdigkeit bewertet, indem die gegenseitige Interaktion zwischen dem Sprachstil der relevanten Artikel, ihre Haltung zur Behauptung und der Vertrauenswürdigkeit der zugrunde liegenden Quellen erfasst wird. Wir verbessern unseren Ansatz zur Bewertung der Glaubwürdigkeit weiter und schlagen ein auf neuronalen Netzen basierendes Modell vor. Im Gegensatz zum featurebasierten Modell ist dieses Modell nicht auf Feature-Engineering und externe Lexika angewiesen. Unsere beiden Modelle machen ihre Einschätzungen interpretierbar, indem sie erklärbare Beweise aus sorgfältig ausgewählten Webquellen extrahieren. Wir verwenden unsere Modelle zur Entwicklung eines Webinterfaces, CredEye, mit dem Benutzer die Glaubwürdigkeit einer Behauptung in Textform automatisch bewerten und verstehen können, indem sie automatisch ausgewählte Beweisstücke einsehen. Darüber hinaus untersuchen wir das Problem der Positionsklassifizierung und schlagen ein auf neuronalen Netzen basierendes Modell vor, um die Position verschiedener Benutzerperspektiven in Bezug auf die umstrittenen Behauptungen vorherzusagen. Bei einer kontroversen Behauptung und einem Benutzerkommentar sagt unser Einstufungsmodell voraus, ob der Benutzerkommentar die Behauptung unterstützt oder ablehnt

Fully Automated Fact Checking Using External Sources

Given the constantly growing proliferation of false claims online in recent years, there has been also a growing research interest in automatically distinguishing false rumors from factually true claims. Here, we propose a general-purpose framework for fully-automatic fact checking using external sources, tapping the potential of the entire Web as a knowledge source to confirm or reject a claim. Our framework uses a deep neural network with LSTM text encoding to combine semantic kernels with task-specific embeddings that encode a claim together with pieces of potentially-relevant text fragments from the Web, taking the source reliability into account. The evaluation results show good performance on two different tasks and datasets: (i) rumor detection and (ii) fact checking of the answers to a question in community question answering forums.Comment: RANLP-201

Fact Checking in Community Forums

Community Question Answering (cQA) forums are very popular nowadays, as they represent effective means for communities around particular topics to share information. Unfortunately, this information is not always factual. Thus, here we explore a new dimension in the context of cQA, which has been ignored so far: checking the veracity of answers to particular questions in cQA forums. As this is a new problem, we create a specialized dataset for it. We further propose a novel multi-faceted model, which captures information from the answer content (what is said and how), from the author profile (who says it), from the rest of the community forum (where it is said), and from external authoritative sources of information (external support). Evaluation results show a MAP value of 86.54, which is 21 points absolute above the baseline.Comment: AAAI-2018; Fact-Checking; Veracity; Community-Question Answering; Neural Networks; Distributed Representation

False News On Social Media: A Data-Driven Survey

In the past few years, the research community has dedicated growing interest to the issue of false news circulating on social networks. The widespread attention on detecting and characterizing false news has been motivated by considerable backlashes of this threat against the real world. As a matter of fact, social media platforms exhibit peculiar characteristics, with respect to traditional news outlets, which have been particularly favorable to the proliferation of deceptive information. They also present unique challenges for all kind of potential interventions on the subject. As this issue becomes of global concern, it is also gaining more attention in academia. The aim of this survey is to offer a comprehensive study on the recent advances in terms of detection, characterization and mitigation of false news that propagate on social media, as well as the challenges and the open questions that await future research on the field. We use a data-driven approach, focusing on a classification of the features that are used in each study to characterize false information and on the datasets used for instructing classification methods. At the end of the survey, we highlight emerging approaches that look most promising for addressing false news

A framework for interrogating social media images to reveal an emergent archive of war

The visual image has long been central to how war is seen, contested and legitimised, remembered and forgotten. Archives are pivotal to these ends as is their ownership and access, from state and other official repositories through to the countless photographs scattered and hidden from a collective understanding of what war looks like in individual collections and dusty attics. With the advent and rapid development of social media, however, the amateur and the professional, the illicit and the sanctioned, the personal and the official, and the past and the present, all seem to inhabit the same connected and chaotic space.However, to even begin to render intelligible the complexity, scale and volume of what war looks like in social media archives is a considerable task, given the limitations of any traditional human-based method of collection and analysis. We thus propose the production of a series of ‘snapshots’, using computer-aided extraction and identification techniques to try to offer an experimental way in to conceiving a new imaginary of war. We were particularly interested in testing to see if twentieth century wars, obviously initially captured via pre-digital means, had become more ‘settled’ over time in terms of their remediated presence today through their visual representations and connections on social media, compared with wars fought in digital media ecologies (i.e. those fought and initially represented amidst the volume and pervasiveness of social media images).To this end, we developed a framework for automatically extracting and analysing war images that appear in social media, using both the features of the images themselves, and the text and metadata associated with each image. The framework utilises a workflow comprising four core stages: (1) information retrieval, (2) data pre-processing, (3) feature extraction, and (4) machine learning. Our corpus was drawn from the social media platforms Facebook and Flickr