Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 26

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Influence-Aware Truth Discovery

Zhang, Hengtong, Li, Qi, Ma, Fenglong, Xiao, Houping, Li, Yaliang, Gao, Jing, Su, Lu·2016·Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management

Abstract

In the age of big data, information for the same entity can be obtained from different sources, which is inevitably conflicting. Therefore, aggregation methods are needed to identify the trustworthy information from such conflicting data. Truth discovery, which improves the aggregation results by estimating source trustworthiness and discovering truths simultaneously, has become an emerging field. Most truth discovery methods assume that sources make their claims independently, which may not be true in practice. As a matter of fact, influences among sources are ubiquitous and the claims made by one source may be influenced by others. Although there is some work that considers source correlation, those methods are designed to handle categorical claims, which is not general enough to represent the complicated real world applications. To tackle these challenges in truth discovery, we propose an unsupervised probabilistic model named IATD. The model takes source correlations as prior for influence derivation. To model influences among sources, we introduce "claim trustworthiness", which fuses the trustworthiness of the source which provides the claim and the trustworthiness of its influencers. Besides, the proposed model can handle different data types using different distributions in the probabilistic model. Experiments on real-world datasets show that IATD model can improve the aggregation performance compared with the state-of-the-art truth discovery approaches. The properties of IATD model are further illustrated using simulated datasets.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2983323.2983785

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Cites

Show all 25 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. 10.5591/978-1-57735-516-8/IJCAI11-387 · DOI
  2. 10.5555/2602339.2602344 · DOI
  3. 10.5555/2984093.2984321 · DOI
  4. B. Zhao and J. Han. A probabilistic model for estimating real-valued truth from conflicting sources. In Proc. of QDB, 2012.

Cited by

See all 26

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, H., Li, Q., Ma, F., Xiao, H., Li, Y., Gao, J., & Su, L.
Venue
Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
Publisher
ACM
Published
2016-10-24
Pages
851-860
Cited by
26
References
25
Funders
National Science Foundation (IIS-1319973, IIS-1553411, CNS-1566374)

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: Influence-Aware Truth Discovery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/2983323.2983785
The paper
Zhang, H., Li, Q., Ma, F., Xiao, H., Li, Y., Gao, J., & Su, L. (2016). Influence-Aware Truth Discovery. Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. https://doi.org/10.1145/2983323.2983785

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.