mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Neural models for Factual Inconsistency Classification with Explanations

arXiv 2306.08872 ↗First posted 15 Jun 2023cs.CL cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Factual consistency is one of the most important requirements when editing high quality documents. It is extremely important for automatic text generation systems like summarization, question answering, dialog modeling, and language modeling. Still, automated factual inconsistency detection is rather under-studied. Existing work has focused on (a) finding fake news keeping a knowledge base in context, or (b) detecting broad contradiction (as part of natural language inference literature). However, there has been no work on detecting and explaining types of factual inconsistencies in text, without any knowledge base in context. In this paper, we leverage existing work in linguistics to formally define five types of factual inconsistencies. Based on this categorization, we contribute a novel dataset, FICLE (Factual Inconsistency CLassification with Explanation), with ~8K samples where each sample consists of two sentences (claim and context) annotated with type and span of inconsistency. When the inconsistency relates to an entity type, it is labeled as well at two levels (coarse and fine-grained). Further, we leverage this dataset to train a pipeline of four neural models to predict inconsistency type with explanations, given a (claim, context) sentence pair. Explanations include inconsistent claim fact triple, inconsistent context span, inconsistent claim component, coarse and fine-grained inconsistent entity types. The proposed system first predicts inconsistent spans from claim and context; and then uses them to predict inconsistency types and inconsistent entity types (when inconsistency is due to entities). We experiment with multiple Transformer-based natural language classification as well as generative models, and find that DeBERTa performs the best. Our proposed methods provide a weighted F1 of ~87% for inconsistency type classification across the five classes.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2023.

Builds on

30 of 41 references.

References · 30

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  5. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  6. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  7. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  8. 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,665
  9. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,157
  10. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
  11. 2015A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inferencecited by 1,837
  12. 2018FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERificationcited by 1,362
18 more
  1. 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 895
  2. 2019Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understandingcited by 798
  3. 2019Defending Against Neural Fake Newscited by 553
  4. 2018e-SNLI: Natural Language Inference with Natural Language Explanationscited by 468
  5. 2020Asking and Answering Questions to Evaluate the Factual Consistency of Summariescited by 376
  6. 2021Entity-Based Knowledge Conflicts in Question Answeringcited by 349
  7. 2019Neural Text Summarization: A Critical Evaluationcited by 189
  8. 2020Detecting Hallucinated Content in Conditional Neural Sequence Generationcited by 151
  9. 2017Faithful to the Original: Fact Aware Neural Abstractive Summarizationcited by 141
  10. 2020Generating Fact Checking Explanationscited by 132
  11. 2021Q2: Evaluating Factual Consistency in Knowledge-Grounded Dialogues via Question Generation and Question Answeringcited by 131
  12. 2021Entity-level Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 118
  13. 2020NILE : Natural Language Inference with Faithful Natural Language Explanationscited by 96
  14. 2020Evaluating Semantic Accuracy of Data-to-Text Generation with Natural Language Inferencecited by 43
  15. 2019Generating Token-Level Explanations for Natural Language Inferencecited by 28
  16. 2020TaxiNLI: Taking a Ride up the NLU Hillcited by 27
  17. 2020Constrained Abstractive Summarization: Preserving Factual Consistency with Constrained Generationcited by 26
  18. 2015Discriminative Predicate Path Mining for Fact Checking in Knowledge Graphscited by 23

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1.

1 paper.