← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1589 · 记录 #1
ClaimDB: A Fact Verification Benchmark over Large Structured Data
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:52
摘要
Real-world fact-checking often involves verifying claims grounded in structured data at scale. Despite substantial progress in fact-verification benchmarks, this setting remains largely underexplored. In this work, we introduce ClaimDB, a fact-verification benchmark where the evidence for claims is derived from compositions of millions of records and multiple tables. ClaimDB consists of 80 unique real-life databases covering a wide range of domains, from governance and healthcare to media, education and the natural sciences. At this scale, verification approaches that rely on “reading” the evidence break down, forcing a timely shift toward reasoning in executable programs. We conduct extensive experiments with 30 state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source (below 70B) LLMs and find that more than half score below 55% accuracy. Our analysis also reveals that both closed- and open-source models struggle with abstention – the ability to admit that there is no evidence to decide – raising doubts about their reliability in high-stakes data analysis tasks. We release the benchmark, code, and the LLM leaderboard at https://claimdb.github.io.
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
ClaimDB: A Fact Verification Benchmark over Large Structured Data
Real-world fact-checking often involves verifying claims grounded in structured data at scale. Despite substantial progress in fact-verification benchmarks, this setting remains largely underexplored. In this work, we introduce ClaimDB, a fact-verification benchmark where the evidence for claims is derived from compositions of millions of records and multiple tables. ClaimDB consists of 80 unique real-life databases covering a wide range of domains, from governance and healthcare to media, education and the natural sciences. At this scale, verification approaches that rely on “reading” the evidence break down, forcing a timely shift toward reasoning in executable programs. We conduct extensive experiments with 30 state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source (below 70B) LLMs and find that more than half score below 55% accuracy. Our analysis also reveals that both closed- and open-source models struggle with abstention – the ability to admit that there is no evidence to decide – raising doubts about their reliability in high-stakes data analysis tasks. We release the benchmark, code, and the LLM leaderboard at https://claimdb.github.io.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗