Abstract:The past decade has seen a substantial rise in the amount of mis- and disinformation online, from targeted disinformation campaigns to influence politics, to the unintentional spreading of misinformation about public health. This development has spurred research in the area of automatic fact checking, from approaches to detect check-worthy claims and determining the stance of tweets towards claims, to methods to determine the veracity of claims given evidence documents. These automatic methods are often content-based, using natural language processing methods, which in turn utilise deep neural networks to learn higher-order features from text in order to make predictions. As deep neural networks are black-box models, their inner workings cannot be easily explained. At the same time, it is desirable to explain how they arrive at certain decisions, especially if they are to be used for decision making. While this has been known for some time, the issues this raises have been exacerbated by models increasing in size, and by EU legislation requiring models to be used for decision making to provide explanations, and, very recently, by legislation requiring online platforms operating in the EU to provide transparent reporting on their services. Despite this, current solutions for explainability are still lacking in the area of fact checking. This thesis presents my research on automatic fact checking, including claim check-worthiness detection, stance detection and veracity prediction. Its contributions go beyond fact checking, with the thesis proposing more general machine learning solutions for natural language processing in the area of learning with limited labelled data. Finally, the thesis presents some first solutions for explainable fact checking.

Evaluating Evidence Attribution in Generated Fact Checking Explanations

Can LLMs Produce Faithful Explanations For Fact-checking? Towards Faithful Explainable Fact-Checking via Multi-Agent Debate

Take It Easy: Label-Adaptive Self-Rationalization for Fact Verification and Explanation Generation

Explainability of Automated Fact Verification Systems: A Comprehensive Review

Facilitating Human-LLM Collaboration through Factuality Scores and Source Attributions

On the Evaluation Consistency of Attribution-based Explanations

Can We Really Trust Explanations? Evaluating the Stability of Feature Attribution Explanation Methods via Adversarial Attack.

Learning to generate and evaluate fact-checking explanations with transformers

Towards Explainable Fact Checking

Automatic Evaluation of Attribution by Large Language Models

Evaluating Human Alignment and Model Faithfulness of LLM Rationale

Explainable Automated Fact-Checking for Public Health Claims

Augmenting the Veracity and Explanations of Complex Fact Checking via Iterative Self-Revision with LLMs

Advancing Large Language Model Attribution through Self-Improving

Evaluation of Attribution Bias in Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models

Correctness is not Faithfulness in RAG Attributions

Benchmarking the Generation of Fact Checking Explanations

Towards Faithful Natural Language Explanations: A Study Using Activation Patching in Large Language Models

Give Me More Details: Improving Fact-Checking with Latent Retrieval

Ask to Know More: Generating Counterfactual Explanations for Fake Claims