跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+2新增论文
+2其中 AI 相关
+0已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-13 05:02 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-12 06:37各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-12 05:59 — 2026-11-13 05:59(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-13 05:02最近发现新增版本:2026-11-12 06:37库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-11 08:00

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

21,675 已收录论文18,323 AI 相关6,056 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-13 05:00(北京时间)
首次观测 · 记录 #1ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-srw.99ACL Anthology · ACL 2026

Constructing a Japanese Verdict Prediction Dataset for Fact-Checking of LLM-Generated Texts

Miwa Masano, Hirokazu Kiyomaru National Institute of Informatics, Atsushi Keyaki Hitotsubashi University, Kaito Horio Waseda University, Rei Minamoto, Ribeka Keyaki Tokyo University of Technology, Kouta Nakayama NII, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Hideyuki Tachibana National Institute of Informatics and Asia University 等 9 位作者

原文摘要

The development of fact-checking systems for verifying the factuality of text generated by large language models (LLMs) has been advancing.In the verdict prediction step of such systems, the system determines whether claims in the generated text are supported by retrieved evidence, formulated as a natural language inference (NLI) task.This study extends the label set for verdict prediction to capture claim-evidence relationships that humans would commonly interpret as supported or refuted, even in the absence of strict logical entailment or contradiction.It also constructs a Japanese dataset comprising 28,147 instances from two sources based on this extended label set.We analyze the causes of annotation disagreement and find that ambiguity in the boundary of acceptable inference, interpretive characteristics of negative cases, and incomplete information in the evidence affect annotation variability.Using this dataset, we evaluate the performance of prompt-based verdict prediction methods and show that prompts that explicitly elicit chain-of-thought reasoning improve F1 by 4 percentage points compared to baseline.

cs.CL

Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop) · 2026 · 正式发表