Papers › VERITE: A Robust Benchmark for Multimodal Misinformation Detection Accounting for Unimodal Bias
VERITE: A Robust Benchmark for Multimodal Misinformation Detection Accounting for Unimodal Bias
Stefanos-Iordanis Papadopoulos, Christos Koutlis, Symeon Papadopoulos, Panagiotis C. Petrantonakis
Multimedia content has become ubiquitous on social media platforms, leading to the rise of multimodal misinformation (MM) and the urgent need for effective strategies to detect and prevent its spread. In recent years, the challenge of multimodal misinformation detection (MMD) has garnered significant attention by researchers and has mainly involved the creation of annotated, weakly annotated, or synthetically generated training datasets, along with the development of various deep learning MMD models. However, the problem of unimodal bias has been overlooked, where specific patterns and biases in MMD benchmarks can result in biased or unimodal models outperforming their multimodal counterparts on an inherently multimodal task; making it difficult to assess progress. In this study, we systematically investigate and identify the presence of unimodal bias in widely-used MMD benchmarks, namely VMU-Twitter and COSMOS. To address this issue, we introduce the "VERification of Image-TExt pairs" (VERITE) benchmark for MMD which incorporates real-world data, excludes "asymmetric multimodal misinformation" and utilizes "modality balancing". We conduct an extensive comparative study with a Transformer-based architecture that shows the ability of VERITE to effectively address unimodal bias, rendering it a robust evaluation framework for MMD. Furthermore, we introduce a new method -- termed Crossmodal HArd Synthetic MisAlignment (CHASMA) -- for generating realistic synthetic training data that preserve crossmodal relations between legitimate images and false human-written captions. By leveraging CHASMA in the training process, we observe consistent and notable improvements in predictive performance on VERITE; with a 9.2% increase in accuracy. We release our code at: https://github.com/stevejpapad/image-text-verification
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2304.14133")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 5 code samples harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper; 4 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: official repository: 5 samples from 2 repositories, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
5 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 5 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
ebda1f758f7fcb92 · report
2d6c4da1031026ab · report
377fa9464398a7a7 · report
ee3f6929dd21fa19 · report
9adac86ab6a4ec5b · report
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
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