A Hybrid Approach for Identifying Authentic News Using Deep Learning Methods on Popular Twitter Threads
Abstract
Now a day's social networks have become a crucial part and parcel in our day to day life. The gradual rise of the amount of information available in different kind of social media is the sole reason behind this impact. However, having the scope of accessing this huge amount of information so easily has made it complicated to find the contrast between counterfeit and an actual news. Some group of people often grabs this chance to share manipulated information to a huge number of people with an intent of destroying the image of any people, person or any specific groups. This results in creating such agendas which creates havoc to social welfare and peacefulness. Due to this fast circulation in such a small amount of time, it is almost impossible to manually detect the sources and authenticity of fake news effectively and efficiently. This is where computational and automated methods come handy to detect such kind of act in social media. We can decide whether any piece of text is either fabricated or not based on previously experienced real or fabricated news. In this study our contribution has three principal parts. First, we introduce our manually collected dataset and its details, then we go on to use some significant concepts of Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning models to train our model and lastly, we provided some comparison with the existing algorithms from different machine learning techniques which proves the superiority of our proposed model. Our model a…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Fake news tends to have more complicated stories and hardly ever makes references.
“Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. (2020) reported that fake news tends to have more complicated stories and hardly ever make any references.”
From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2020
Fake news is more likely to contain a greater number of words expressing negative emotions.
“It is more likely to contain a greater number of words that express negative emotions.”
From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2020
It is almost impossible to manually detect the sources and authenticity of fake news effectively and efficiently due to its fast circulation in a small amount of time.
“Lastly, Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. (2020) note that it is almost impossible to manually detect the sources and authenticity of fake news effectively and efficiently, due to its fast circulation in such a small amount of time.”
From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Abdullah-All-Tanvir et al. 2020
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 13 · Cited by 6
- Authors
- Tanvir, A. A., Mahir, E. M., Huda, S. M. A., & Barua, S.
- Affiliations
- East West University (BD)
- ORCID
- Abdullah All Tanvir
- Venue
- 2020 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Signal Processing (AISP)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2020-01
- Pages
- 1-6
- OpenAlex
- W3019443008
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 1.59
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Signal Processing (AISP) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
- Keywords
- fake news detection, news authenticity, Twitter threads, social media misinformation, Bayesian classifier, deep learning for text classification
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