# NLPCC 2026 Task 10: Citation-Level Faithfulness Verification with DeBERTa Ensembles and Class-Wise Calibration

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.22774 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.22774/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 10 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [SciBERT: A Pretrained Language Model for Scientific Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.10676/) (2019)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09543/) (2021)
- [Fact or Fiction: Verifying Scientific Claims](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14974/) (2020)
- [A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03011/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper presents our system for Track 2 of the NLPCC 2026 Shared Task 10 on citation-level faithfulness in AI-assisted scientific reporting. Given an atomic scientific claim and the structured full text of its cited paper, the task requires both a four-way relation label and up to three evidence paragraph identifiers. The label head ensembles a paragraph-aware cross-encoder with a document-level DeBERTa-large classifier, followed by class-wise decision calibration. Probability-level fusion is motivated by an out-of-fold tendency to over-predict Topical Match. The evidence head combines paragraph scores from top-20 and top-30 joint models with BM25 scores. The system runs fully offline without external retrieval or LLM prompting. On the final leaderboard, our system achieved 82.9898 overall (89.5491 Macro-F1 and 76.4305 Joint@3), ranking second in Track 2. Ablations and error analysis show that model complementarity and calibration drive the label gains. Gold-evidence inference changes label Macro-F1 negligibly, whereas evidence ranking remains important for Joint@3.