Scholarlink

In contrasting misinformation, both automated approaches using Large Language Models (LLMs) and human-based crowdsourcing have been explored. We enhance LLMs with a retrieval component to create a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) fact-checking system. Using state-of-the-art LLMs and a popular dataset, we empirically evaluate the system’s effectiveness and compare it with crowdsourced annotations. Our findings indicate that while RAG systems excel at detecting clear misinformation, they struggle with subtler distinctions where human judgment is more discerning. Interestingly, RAG systems show higher effectiveness on newer statements, suggesting adaptability to emerging misinformation.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A Comparative Analysis of Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Crowdsourcing for Fact-Checking

  • 会议论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Francesco Bombassei De Bona,
  • David La Barbera,
  • Stefano Mizzaro,
  • Kevin Roitero

摘要

In contrasting misinformation, both automated approaches using Large Language Models (LLMs) and human-based crowdsourcing have been explored. We enhance LLMs with a retrieval component to create a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) fact-checking system. Using state-of-the-art LLMs and a popular dataset, we empirically evaluate the system’s effectiveness and compare it with crowdsourced annotations. Our findings indicate that while RAG systems excel at detecting clear misinformation, they struggle with subtler distinctions where human judgment is more discerning. Interestingly, RAG systems show higher effectiveness on newer statements, suggesting adaptability to emerging misinformation.