Papers › Efficient Annotator Reliability Assessment and Sample Weighting for Knowledge-Based...
Efficient Annotator Reliability Assessment and Sample Weighting for Knowledge-Based Misinformation Detection on Social Media
Owen Cook, Charlie Grimshaw, Ben Wu, Sophie Dillon, Jack Hicks, Luke Jones, Thomas Smith, Matyas Szert, Xingyi Song
Misinformation spreads rapidly on social media, confusing the truth and targeting potentially vulnerable people. To effectively mitigate the negative impact of misinformation, it must first be accurately detected before applying a mitigation strategy, such as X's community notes, which is currently a manual process. This study takes a knowledge-based approach to misinformation detection, modelling the problem similarly to one of natural language inference. The EffiARA annotation framework is introduced, aiming to utilise inter- and intra-annotator agreement to understand the reliability of each annotator and influence the training of large language models for classification based on annotator reliability. In assessing the EffiARA annotation framework, the Russo-Ukrainian Conflict Knowledge-Based Misinformation Classification Dataset (RUC-MCD) was developed and made publicly available. This study finds that sample weighting using annotator reliability performs the best, utilising both inter- and intra-annotator agreement and soft-label training. The highest classification performance achieved using Llama-3.2-1B was a macro-F1 of 0.757 and 0.740 using TwHIN-BERT-large.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
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.
Tasks
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