Paper detail

One LLM to Train Them All: Multi-Task Learning Framework for Fact-Checking

Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping automated fact-checking (AFC) by enabling unified, end-to-end verification pipelines rather than isolated components. While large proprietary models achieve strong performance, their closed weights, complexity, and high costs limit sustainability. Fine-tuning smaller open weight models for individual AFC tasks can help but requires multiple specialized models resulting in high costs. We propose \textbf{multi-task learning (MTL)} as a more efficient alternative that fine-tunes a single model to perform claim detection, evidence ranking, and stance detection jointly. Using small decoder-only LLMs (e.g., Qwen3-4b), we explore three MTL strategies: classification heads, causal language modeling heads, and instruction-tuning, and evaluate them across model sizes, task orders, and standard non-LLM baselines. While multitask models do not universally surpass single-task baselines, they yield substantial improvements, achieving up to \textbf{44\%}, \textbf{54\%}, and \textbf{31\%} relative gains for claim detection, evidence re-ranking, and stance detection, respectively, over zero-/few-shot settings. Finally, we also provide practical, empirically grounded guidelines to help practitioners apply MTL with LLMs for automated fact-checking.

preprint2026arXivOpen 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.