Papers › Detecting False Rumors from Retweet Dynamics on Social Media
Detecting False Rumors from Retweet Dynamics on Social Media
Christof Naumzik, Stefan Feuerriegel
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
False rumors are known to have detrimental effects on society. To prevent the spread of false rumors, social media platforms such as Twitter must detect them early. In this work, we develop a novel probabilistic mixture model that classifies true vs. false rumors based on the underlying spreading process. Specifically, our model is the first to formalize the self-exciting nature of true vs. false retweeting processes. This results in a novel mixture marked Hawkes model (MMHM). Owing to this, our model obviates the need for feature engineering; instead, it directly models the spreading process in order to make inferences of whether online rumors are incorrect. Our evaluation is based on 13,650 retweet cascades of both true. vs. false rumors from Twitter. Our model recognizes false rumors with a balanced accuracy of 64.97% and an AUC of 69.46%. It outperforms state-of-the-art baselines (both neural and feature engineering) by a considerable margin but while being fully interpretable. Our work has direct implications for practitioners: it leverages the spreading process as an implicit quality signal and, based on it, detects false content.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections