ReproHum #0087-01: Human Evaluation Reproduction Report for Generating Fact Checking Explanations

Tyler Loakman, Chenghua Lin
4/26/2024
cs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

This paper presents a partial reproduction of Generating Fact Checking Explanations by Anatanasova et al (2020) as part of the ReproHum element of the ReproNLP shared task to reproduce the findings of NLP research regarding human evaluation. This shared task aims to investigate the extent to which NLP as a field is becoming more or less reproducible over time. Following the instructions provided by the task organisers and the original authors, we collect relative rankings of 3 fact-checking explanations (comprising a gold standard and the outputs of 2 models) for 40 inputs on the criteria of Coverage. The results of our reproduction and reanalysis of the original work's raw results lend support to the original findings, with similar patterns seen between the original work and our reproduction. Whilst we observe slight variation from the original results, our findings support the main conclusions drawn by the original authors pertaining to the efficacy of their proposed models.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{loakman2024reprohum,
  title  = {ReproHum #0087-01: Human Evaluation Reproduction Report for Generating Fact Checking Explanations},
  author = {Tyler Loakman and Chenghua Lin},
  year   = {2024},
  eprint = {2404.17481},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.17481v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2404.17481.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2404.17481)

Discussion