# Debate-to-Detect: Reformulating Misinformation Detection as a Real-World Debate with Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.18596 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.18596/

## Key facts

- Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 27 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 May 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 27 of 27)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04023/) (2023)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07201/) (2023)
- [Justice or Prejudice? Quantifying Biases in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02736/) (2024)
- [The Landscape of Emerging AI Agent Architectures for Reasoning, Planning, and Tool Calling: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11584/) (2024)
- [Automatic Detection of Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1708.07104/) (2017)
- [Large language models that replace human participants can harmfully misportray and flatten identity groups](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01908/) (2024)
- [On the Risk of Misinformation Pollution with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13661/) (2023)
- [Improving Multi-Agent Debate with Sparse Communication Topology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11776/) (2024)
- [Bias and Unfairness in Information Retrieval Systems: New Challenges in the LLM Era](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11457/) (2024)
- [MDFEND: Multi-domain Fake News Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.00987/) (2022)
- [KAM-CoT: Knowledge Augmented Multimodal Chain-of-Thoughts Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.12863/) (2024)
- [MultiAgent Collaboration Attack: Investigating Adversarial Attacks in Large Language Model Collaborations via Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14711/) (2024)
- [DELL: Generating Reactions and Explanations for LLM-Based Misinformation Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10426/) (2024)
- [AgentsCourt: Building Judicial Decision-Making Agents with Court Debate Simulation and Legal Knowledge Augmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02959/) (2024)
- [Reinforcement Learning-based Counter-Misinformation Response Generation: A Case Study of COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.06433/) (2023)
- [Can LLMs Beat Humans in Debating? A Dynamic Multi-agent Framework for Competitive Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.04472/) (2024)
- [Unmasking Digital Falsehoods: A Comparative Analysis of LLM-Based Misinformation Detection Strategies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.00724/) (2025)
- [The Many Dimensions of Truthfulness: Crowdsourcing Misinformation Assessments on a Multidimensional Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.01222/) (2021)
- [Fake News Detection After LLM Laundering: Measurement and Explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.18649/) (2025)
- [Decoding Susceptibility: Modeling Misbelief to Misinformation Through a Computational Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09630/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Conformity Dynamics in LLM Multi-Agent Systems: The Roles of Topology and Self-Social Weighting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05606/) (2026)
- [Debating Truth: Debate-driven Claim Verification with Multiple Large Language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.19090/) (2025)
- [Courtroom-Style Multi-Agent Debate with Progressive RAG and Role-Switching for Controversial Claim Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.28488/) (2026)
- [Multi-Agent Debate Strategies: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.26212/) (2026)
- [Multiperspectivity as a Resource for Narrative Similarity Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.22103/) (2026)
- [When Misinformation Speaks and Converses: Rethinking Fact-Checking in Audio Platforms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.16767/) (2026)
- [Debating the Unspoken: Role-Anchored Multi-Agent Reasoning for Half-Truth Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.19005/) (2026)
- [Causal Invariance and Counterfactual Learning Driven Cooperative Game for Multi-Label Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.00812/) (2025)
- [More Than Sum of Its Parts: Deciphering Intent Shifts in Multimodal Hate Speech Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.21298/) (2026)
- [Large Language Models in Misinformation Ecosystems: Misuse, Defense, and Vulnerability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.10402/) (2026)
- [The Civilization Framework: Sovereign-Anchored Communication Between Personal Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.03425/) (2026)
- [MABPD: Multi-Agent Bias Probing & Detection via Structured Argument Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.04841/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The proliferation of misinformation in digital platforms reveals the limitations of traditional detection methods, which mostly rely on static classification and fail to capture the intricate process of real-world fact-checking. Despite advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) that enhance automated reasoning, their application to misinformation detection remains hindered by issues of logical inconsistency and superficial verification. In response, we introduce Debate-to-Detect (D2D), a novel Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) framework that reformulates misinformation detection as a structured adversarial debate. Inspired by fact-checking workflows, D2D assigns domain-specific profiles to each agent and orchestrates a five-stage debate process, including Opening Statement, Rebuttal, Free Debate, Closing Statement, and Judgment. To transcend traditional binary classification, D2D introduces a multi-dimensional evaluation mechanism that assesses each claim across five distinct dimensions: Factuality, Source Reliability, Reasoning Quality, Clarity, and Ethics. Experiments with GPT-4o on two datasets demonstrate significant improvements over baseline methods, and the case study highlight D2D's capability to iteratively refine evidence while improving decision transparency, representing a substantial advancement towards interpretable misinformation detection. The code will be released publicly after the official publication.