# SAFE-MR: Evidence Sufficiency Learning for Selective Multimodal Rumor Detection

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.06708 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.06708/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 15 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Oct 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [MMFakeBench: A Mixed-Source Multimodal Misinformation Detection Benchmark for LVLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.08772/) (2024)
- [VERITE: A Robust Benchmark for Multimodal Misinformation Detection Accounting for Unimodal Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.14133/) (2023)
- [E2LVLM:Evidence-Enhanced Large Vision-Language Model for Multimodal Out-of-Context Misinformation Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.10455/) (2025)
- [XFacta: Contemporary, Real-World Dataset and Evaluation for Multimodal Misinformation Detection with Multimodal LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.09999/) (2025)
- [Mitigating GenAI-Powered Evidence Pollution for Out-Of-Context Misinformation Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14728/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Multimodal rumor detectors increasingly rely on retrieved evidence, yet relevant evidence is not necessarily sufficient for verification. Missing provenance, duplicated reports, and unresolved contradictions can produce confident predictions without adequate support. We introduce SAFE-MR, a framework that separates claim veracity from evidence sufficiency. The method decomposes image-text posts into verifiable claims, constructs a relation-aware claim-evidence graph, and aggregates evidence using provenance and contextual compatibility. Separate veracity and sufficiency heads support selective prediction, while evidence interventions encourage stability under irrelevant additions and sensitivity to evidence removal. On NewsCLIPpings, VERITE, and XFacta, SAFE-MR achieves macro-F1 scores of 91.2%, 75.8%, and 85.2%, respectively. Against the matched backbone with evidence, its macro-F1 gains are 2.2, 4.9, and 4.8 percentage points. On the diagnostic selection set, SAFE-MR reduces AURC from 0.105 for maximum-probability rejection to 0.075 and lowers error at 80% coverage from 13.8% to 8.5%. Evidence-perturbation and ablation results support the role of sufficiency learning and intervention training in improving selective verification.