Papers › Stance Detection Benchmark: How Robust Is Your Stance Detection?

Stance Detection Benchmark: How Robust Is Your Stance Detection?

6 Jan 2020arXiv:2001.01565archive 2025-07-28

Benjamin Schiller, Johannes Daxenberger, Iryna Gurevych

Stance Detection (StD) aims to detect an author's stance towards a certain topic or claim and has become a key component in applications like fake news detection, claim validation, and argument search. However, while stance is easily detected by humans, machine learning models are clearly falling short of this task. Given the major differences in dataset sizes and framing of StD (e.g. number of classes and inputs), we introduce a StD benchmark that learns from ten StD datasets of various domains in a multi-dataset learning (MDL) setting, as well as from related tasks via transfer learning. Within this benchmark setup, we are able to present new state-of-the-art results on five of the datasets. Yet, the models still perform well below human capabilities and even simple adversarial attacks severely hurt the performance of MDL models. Deeper investigation into this phenomenon suggests the existence of biases inherited from multiple datasets by design. Our analysis emphasizes the need of focus on robustness and de-biasing strategies in multi-task learning approaches. The benchmark dataset and code is made 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

10 samples harvested; 2 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 8 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 10 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/mdl-stance-robustness. “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