CHECKWHY: Causal Fact Verification via Argument Structure
With the growing complexity of fact verification tasks, the concern with "thoughtful" reasoning capabilities is increasing. However, recent fact verification benchmarks mainly focus on checking a narrow scope of semantic factoids within claims and lack an explicit logical reasoning process. In this paper, we introduce CheckWhy, a challenging dataset tailored to a novel causal fact verification task: checking the truthfulness of the causal relation within claims through rigorous reasoning steps. CheckWhy consists of over 19K "why" claim-evidence-argument structure triplets with supports, refutes, and not enough info labels. Each argument structure is composed of connected evidence, representing the reasoning process that begins with foundational evidence and progresses toward claim establishment. Through extensive experiments on state-of-the-art models, we validate the importance of incorporating the argument structure for causal fact verification. Moreover, the automated and human evaluation of argument structure generation reveals the difficulty in producing satisfying argument structure by fine-tuned models or Chain-of-Thought prompted LLMs, leaving considerable room for future improvements.
Code (1)
Tasks
Fact VerificationLogical ReasoningMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
From Causal Models To Counterfactual Structures
Galles and Pearl claimed that "for recursive models, the causal model framework does not add any restrictions to counterfactuals, beyond those imposed by Lewis's [possible-worlds] framework." This claim is examined caref…
counterfactualThe Argument is the Explanation: Structured Argumentation for Trust in Agents
Humans are black boxes -- we cannot observe their neural processes, yet society functions by evaluating verifiable arguments. AI explainability should follow this principle: stakeholders need verifiable reasoning chains,…
Relation ClassificationArguments using ontological and causal knowledge
We investigate an approach to reasoning about causes through argumentation. We consider a causal model for a physical system, and look for arguments about facts. Some arguments are meant to provide explanations of facts …
Annotating Implicit Reasoning in Arguments with Causal Links
Most of the existing work that focus on the identification of implicit knowledge in arguments generally represent implicit knowledge in the form of commonsense or factual knowledge. However, such knowledge is not suffici…
Annotating Implicit Reasoning in Arguments with Causal Links
Most of the existing work that focus on the identification of implicit knowledge in arguments generally represent implicit knowledge in the form of commonsense or factual knowledge. However, such knowledge is not suffici…