CsFEVER and CTKFacts: acquiring Czech data for fact verification.

IF 1.7 3区 计算机科学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Herbert Ullrich, Jan Drchal, Martin Rýpar, Hana Vincourová, Václav Moravec
{"title":"CsFEVER and CTKFacts: acquiring Czech data for fact verification.","authors":"Herbert Ullrich,&nbsp;Jan Drchal,&nbsp;Martin Rýpar,&nbsp;Hana Vincourová,&nbsp;Václav Moravec","doi":"10.1007/s10579-023-09654-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, we examine several methods of acquiring Czech data for automated fact-checking, which is a task commonly modeled as a classification of textual claim veracity w.r.t. a corpus of trusted ground truths. We attempt to collect sets of data in form of a factual claim, evidence within the ground truth corpus, and its veracity label (<i>supported</i>, <i>refuted</i> or <i>not enough info</i>). As a first attempt, we generate a Czech version of the large-scale FEVER dataset built on top of Wikipedia corpus. We take a hybrid approach of machine translation and document alignment; the approach and the tools we provide can be easily applied to other languages. We discuss its weaknesses, propose a future strategy for their mitigation and publish the 127k resulting translations, as well as a version of such dataset reliably applicable for the Natural Language Inference task-the CsFEVER-NLI. Furthermore, we collect a novel dataset of 3,097 claims, which is annotated using the corpus of 2.2 M articles of Czech News Agency. We present an extended dataset annotation methodology based on the FEVER approach, and, as the underlying corpus is proprietary, we also publish a standalone version of the dataset for the task of Natural Language Inference we call CTKFactsNLI. We analyze both acquired datasets for spurious cues-annotation patterns leading to model overfitting. CTKFacts is further examined for inter-annotator agreement, thoroughly cleaned, and a typology of common annotator errors is extracted. Finally, we provide baseline models for all stages of the fact-checking pipeline and publish the NLI datasets, as well as our annotation platform and other experimental data.</p>","PeriodicalId":49927,"journal":{"name":"Language Resources and Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":"1-35"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10155175/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Resources and Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-023-09654-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In this paper, we examine several methods of acquiring Czech data for automated fact-checking, which is a task commonly modeled as a classification of textual claim veracity w.r.t. a corpus of trusted ground truths. We attempt to collect sets of data in form of a factual claim, evidence within the ground truth corpus, and its veracity label (supported, refuted or not enough info). As a first attempt, we generate a Czech version of the large-scale FEVER dataset built on top of Wikipedia corpus. We take a hybrid approach of machine translation and document alignment; the approach and the tools we provide can be easily applied to other languages. We discuss its weaknesses, propose a future strategy for their mitigation and publish the 127k resulting translations, as well as a version of such dataset reliably applicable for the Natural Language Inference task-the CsFEVER-NLI. Furthermore, we collect a novel dataset of 3,097 claims, which is annotated using the corpus of 2.2 M articles of Czech News Agency. We present an extended dataset annotation methodology based on the FEVER approach, and, as the underlying corpus is proprietary, we also publish a standalone version of the dataset for the task of Natural Language Inference we call CTKFactsNLI. We analyze both acquired datasets for spurious cues-annotation patterns leading to model overfitting. CTKFacts is further examined for inter-annotator agreement, thoroughly cleaned, and a typology of common annotator errors is extracted. Finally, we provide baseline models for all stages of the fact-checking pipeline and publish the NLI datasets, as well as our annotation platform and other experimental data.

Abstract Image

CsFEVER和CTKFacts:获取捷克数据进行事实核查。
在本文中,我们研究了几种获取捷克数据进行自动事实核查的方法,这是一项通常被建模为文本声明真实性的分类的任务。我们试图以事实主张、基本事实语料库中的证据及其真实性标签(支持、反驳或信息不足)的形式收集数据集。作为第一次尝试,我们在维基百科语料库的基础上生成了大型FEVER数据集的捷克版本。我们采用机器翻译和文档对齐的混合方法;我们提供的方法和工具可以很容易地应用于其他语言。我们讨论了它的弱点,提出了一个未来的缓解策略,并公布了127k个翻译结果,以及一个可靠适用于自然语言推理任务的数据集版本——CsFEVER NLI。此外,我们收集了3097项索赔的新数据集,该数据集使用捷克通讯社220万篇文章的语料库进行了注释。我们提出了一种基于FEVER方法的扩展数据集注释方法,由于底层语料库是专有的,我们还发布了一个独立版本的数据集,用于我们称之为CTKFactsNLI的自然语言推理任务。我们分析了两个采集的数据集中导致模型过拟合的虚假线索注释模式。CTKFacts被进一步检查注释器之间的一致性,彻底清理,并提取常见注释器错误的类型。最后,我们为事实核查管道的所有阶段提供了基线模型,并发布了NLI数据集,以及我们的注释平台和其他实验数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Language Resources and Evaluation
Language Resources and Evaluation 工程技术-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
55
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Language Resources and Evaluation is the first publication devoted to the acquisition, creation, annotation, and use of language resources, together with methods for evaluation of resources, technologies, and applications. Language resources include language data and descriptions in machine readable form used to assist and augment language processing applications, such as written or spoken corpora and lexica, multimodal resources, grammars, terminology or domain specific databases and dictionaries, ontologies, multimedia databases, etc., as well as basic software tools for their acquisition, preparation, annotation, management, customization, and use. Evaluation of language resources concerns assessing the state-of-the-art for a given technology, comparing different approaches to a given problem, assessing the availability of resources and technologies for a given application, benchmarking, and assessing system usability and user satisfaction.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信