arXiv subjects

James Zhou

Publications and source records attributed to James Zhou.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

CrediBench: Building Web-Scale Network Datasets for Information Integrity

Automatically assessing the credibility of online sources presents an invaluable tool for navigating today's information ecosystem. However, existing approaches either depend on scarce and costly human annotations, or focus exclusively on assessments at the level of individual claims. Misinformation often spreads via interlinked web domains, whose connections evolve over time. Focusing on claims alone ignores these structural and temporal credibility signals evident in the changing web topology. Existing datasets fail to capture these central modalities in web domain credibility prediction: namely, internet topology, temporality and text (webpage) content. To address this gap, we present CrediBench, a dataset containing eights months of web graph data; of which we analyze the three months surrounding the 2024 U.S. federal elections, a time of heightened misinformation propagation online. Each monthly snapshot contains over 40 million nodes, their scraped webpage content, and over 1 billion hyperlink edges. CrediBench supports credibility prediction as both a regression (continuous credibility score) and a binary classification task (credible or not). For classification, we curate a novel binary label set containing 662,575 web domains labelled for boolean credibility, spanning four areas (misinformation, crowd-sourced, malware and phishing). Our empirical experiments support that all task modalities-graph, text and time-contribute significantly to achieving the best performance. In particular, our multi-modal regression model trained on CrediBench outperforms other configurations and existing baselines, decreasing Mean Average Error from 0.162 to 0.107 on the regression task, while the multi-modal classifier improves accuracy from 56% to 85% on the classification one. CrediBench, our proposed web-scale multi-modal dataset, is available on Huggingface for future research.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2024

Epistemic Integrity in Large Language Models

Large language models are increasingly relied upon as sources of information, but their propensity for generating false or misleading statements with high confidence poses risks for users and society. In this paper, we confront the critical problem of epistemic miscalibration $\unicode{x2013}$ where a model's linguistic assertiveness fails to reflect its true internal certainty. We introduce a new human-labeled dataset and a novel method for measuring the linguistic assertiveness of Large Language Models (LLMs) which cuts error rates by over 50% relative to previous benchmarks. Validated across multiple datasets, our method reveals a stark misalignment between how confidently models linguistically present information and their actual accuracy. Further human evaluations confirm the severity of this miscalibration. This evidence underscores the urgent risk of the overstated certainty LLMs hold which may mislead users on a massive scale. Our framework provides a crucial step forward in diagnosing this miscalibration, offering a path towards correcting it and more trustworthy AI across domains.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

A Guide to Misinformation Detection Data and Evaluation

Misinformation is a complex societal issue, and mitigating solutions are difficult to create due to data deficiencies. To address this, we have curated the largest collection of (mis)information datasets in the literature, totaling 75. From these, we evaluated the quality of 36 datasets that consist of statements or claims, as well as the 9 datasets that consist of data in purely paragraph form. We assess these datasets to identify those with solid foundations for empirical work and those with flaws that could result in misleading and non-generalizable results, such as spurious correlations, or examples that are ambiguous or otherwise impossible to assess for veracity. We find the latter issue is particularly severe and affects most datasets in the literature. We further provide state-of-the-art baselines on all these datasets, but show that regardless of label quality, categorical labels may no longer give an accurate evaluation of detection model performance. Finally, we propose and highlight Evaluation Quality Assurance (EQA) as a tool to guide the field toward systemic solutions rather than inadvertently propagating issues in evaluation. Overall, this guide aims to provide a roadmap for higher quality data and better grounded evaluations, ultimately improving research in misinformation detection. All datasets and other artifacts are available at https://misinfo-datasets.complexdatalab.com/.

cs.SI↗