The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Truth Discovery with Multiple Conflicting Information Providers on the Web
Abstract
The World Wide Web has become the most important information source for most of us. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee for the correctness of information on the Web. Moreover, different websites often provide conflicting information on a subject, such as different specifications for the same product. In this paper, we propose a new problem, called Veracity, i.e., conformity to truth, which studies how to find true facts from a large amount of conflicting information on many subjects that is provided by various websites. We design a general framework for the Veracity problem and invent an algorithm, called TRUTHFlNDER, which utilizes the relationships between websites and their information, i.e., a website is trustworthy if it provides many pieces of true information, and a piece of information is likely to be true if it is provided by many trustworthy websites. An iterative method is used to infer the trustworthiness of websites and the correctness of information from each other. Our experiments show that TRUTHFlNDER successfully finds true facts among conflicting information and identifies trustworthy websites better than the popular search engines.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Combating disinformation in a social media age
Shu, K., Bhattacharjee, A., Alatawi, F., Nazer, T. H., Ding, K., Karami, M., & Liu, H. (2020) · WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.1385 · Cited by 198
Credibility Assessment of Textual Claims on the Web
Popat, K., Mukherjee, S., Strötgen, J., & Weikum, G. (2016) · Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/2983323.2983661 · Cited by 177
Data Evaluation and Enhancement for Quality Improvement of Machine Learning
Chen, H., Chen, J., & Ding, J. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Reliability · doi:10.1109/tr.2021.3070863 · Cited by 166
Conflict resolution with data currency and consistency
Fan, W., Geerts, F., Tang, N., & Yu, W. (2014) · Journal of Data and Information Quality · doi:10.1145/2631923 · Cited by 30
Influence-Aware Truth Discovery
Zhang, H., Li, Q., Ma, F., Xiao, H., Li, Y., Gao, J., & Su, L. (2016) · Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management · doi:10.1145/2983323.2983785 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Yin, X., Han, J., & Yu, P. S.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 796-808
- ISSN
- 1041-4347 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2118388899
- Cited by
- 648
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 61.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Truth Discovery with Multiple Conflicting Information Providers on the Web. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tkde.2007.190745
- The paper
- Yin, X., Han, J., & Yu, P. S. (2008). Truth Discovery with Multiple Conflicting Information Providers on the Web. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/tkde.2007.190745
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.