Cited by 36Public Relations and Crisis CommunicationText and Document Classification TechnologiesDisaster Management and Resilience

A social context-aware graph-based multimodal attentive learning framework for disaster content classification during emergencies

Open access
Dar, Shahid Shafi, Rehman, Mohammad Zia Ur, Bais, Karan, Haseeb, Mohammed Abdul, Kumar, Nagendra·2025·Expert Systems with Applications

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eswa.2024.125337

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Zhang et al. proposed a cloud-edge collaborative system that uses vehicle position, speed, and acceleration to model driving behavior and detect abnormal actions like speeding or drunk driving.

    “To address this, Zhang et al. proposed a cloud-edge collaborative system [233], which uses data like vehicle position, speed, and acceleration to model driving behavior and detect abnormal actions like speeding or drunk driving.”

    From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [233]

    Our copy’s Conclusion describes CrisisSpot as a method for classifying disaster-related social media content, not a vehicle-behavior system. Searches for cloud-edge collaboration, vehicle position, speed, acceleration, speeding, and drunk driving found no passage addressing the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Sirbu, I., Sosea, T., Caragea, C., Caragea, D., Rebedea, T., 2022. Multimodal semi-supervised learning for disaster tweet classification, in: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 2711-2723.
  2. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Łukasz Kaiser, Polosukhin, I., 2017. [transformer] attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 2017-Decem.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dar, S. S., Rehman, M. Z. U., Bais, K., Haseeb, M. A., & Kumar, N.
Affiliations
  • Indian Institute of Technology Indore (IN)
  • Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya (IN)
  • Indian Institute of Information Technology Dharwad (IN)
Corresponding author
Dar, Shahid Shafi
Venue
Expert Systems with Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-01
Volume
259
Pages
125337
ISSN
0957-4174 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4402504573
Cited by
36
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 2
FWCI
30.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Expert Systems with Applications (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
Indian Institute of Technology Indore (IITI/YFRCG/2023-24/03)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Text and Document Classification Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
social media, multimodal learning, graph neural networks, attention mechanism, user credibility, emotional context, social interaction, crisis information, disaster response

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review