Papers › "Image, Tell me your story!" Predicting the original meta-context of visual misinformation

"Image, Tell me your story!" Predicting the original meta-context of visual misinformation

19 Aug 2024arXiv:2408.09939archive 2025-07-28

Jonathan Tonglet, Marie-Francine Moens, Iryna Gurevych

To assist human fact-checkers, researchers have developed automated approaches for visual misinformation detection. These methods assign veracity scores by identifying inconsistencies between the image and its caption, or by detecting forgeries in the image. However, they neglect a crucial point of the human fact-checking process: identifying the original meta-context of the image. By explaining what is actually true about the image, fact-checkers can better detect misinformation, focus their efforts on check-worthy visual content, engage in counter-messaging before misinformation spreads widely, and make their explanation more convincing. Here, we fill this gap by introducing the task of automated image contextualization. We create 5Pils, a dataset of 1,676 fact-checked images with question-answer pairs about their original meta-context. Annotations are based on the 5 Pillars fact-checking framework. We implement a first baseline that grounds the image in its original meta-context using the content of the image and textual evidence retrieved from the open web. Our experiments show promising results while highlighting several open challenges in retrieval and reasoning. We make our code and data publicly available.

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

17 samples harvested; 15 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 17 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 UKPLab/5pils. “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.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

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