Paper detail

GERE: Generative Evidence Retrieval for Fact Verification

Fact verification (FV) is a challenging task which aims to verify a claim using multiple evidential sentences from trustworthy corpora, e.g., Wikipedia. Most existing approaches follow a three-step pipeline framework, including document retrieval, sentence retrieval and claim verification. High-quality evidences provided by the first two steps are the foundation of the effective reasoning in the last step. Despite being important, high-quality evidences are rarely studied by existing works for FV, which often adopt the off-the-shelf models to retrieve relevant documents and sentences in an "index-retrieve-then-rank" fashion. This classical approach has clear drawbacks as follows: i) a large document index as well as a complicated search process is required, leading to considerable memory and computational overhead; ii) independent scoring paradigms fail to capture the interactions among documents and sentences in ranking; iii) a fixed number of sentences are selected to form the final evidence set. In this work, we propose GERE, the first system that retrieves evidences in a generative fashion, i.e., generating the document titles as well as evidence sentence identifiers. This enables us to mitigate the aforementioned technical issues since: i) the memory and computational cost is greatly reduced because the document index is eliminated and the heavy ranking process is replaced by a light generative process; ii) the dependency between documents and that between sentences could be captured via sequential generation process; iii) the generative formulation allows us to dynamically select a precise set of relevant evidences for each claim. The experimental results on the FEVER dataset show that GERE achieves significant improvements over the state-of-the-art baselines, with both time-efficiency and memory-efficiency.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.