The DOI matches its DataCite record.
AVeriTeC: A Dataset for Real-world Claim Verification with Evidence from the Web
Abstract
Existing datasets for automated fact-checking have substantial limitations, such as relying on artificial claims, lacking annotations for evidence and intermediate reasoning, or including evidence published after the claim. In this paper we introduce AVeriTeC, a new dataset of 4,568 real-world claims covering fact-checks by 50 different organizations. Each claim is annotated with question-answer pairs supported by evidence available online, as well as textual justifications explaining how the evidence combines to produce a verdict. Through a multi-round annotation process, we avoid common pitfalls including context dependence, evidence insufficiency, and temporal leakage, and reach a substantial inter-annotator agreement of $κ=0.619$ on verdicts. We develop a baseline as well as an evaluation scheme for verifying claims through several question-answering steps against the open web.
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
Sorted by citations
Language agents achieve superhuman synthesis of scientific knowledge
Skarlinski, M. D., Cox, S., Laurent, J. M., Braza, J. D., Hinks, M., Hammerling, M. J., Ponnapati, M., Rodriques, S. G., & White, A. D. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.13740 · Cited by 49
“ContraCrow first extracts claims from a provided paper using a series of LLM completion calls (similar to Schlichtkrull et al. (2024) 30 ), and then feeds those claims into PaperQA2 with a contradiction detection prompt.”
BackgroundFactualRAG: a RAG-Powered framework for LLM fact-checking via IFCN-Accredited sources
Chang, L.-J., & Lai, C.-M. (2026) · Journal of Intelligent Information Systems · doi:10.1007/s10844-026-01041-y · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Schlichtkrull, M., Guo, Z., & Vlachos, A.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- arXiv
- 2305.13117
- References
- 0
- Type
- Preprint
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