REVIEW 1 cited by
It's about Time: Rethinking Evaluation on Rumor Detection Benchmarks using Chronological Splits
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
New events emerge over time influencing the topics of rumors in social media. Current rumor detection benchmarks use random splits as training, development and test sets which typically results in topical overlaps. Consequently, models trained on random splits may not perform well on rumor classification on previously unseen topics due to the temporal concept drift. In this paper, we provide a re-evaluation of classification models on four popular rumor detection benchmarks considering chronological instead of random splits. Our experimental results show that the use of random splits can significantly overestimate predictive performance across all datasets and models. Therefore, we suggest that rumor detection models should always be evaluated using chronological splits for minimizing topical overlaps.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Framework of Voting Prediction of Parliament Members
A multi-country framework predicts individual parliamentary votes with up to 85% accuracy and bill outcomes with up to 84% accuracy, but the evaluation does not include trivial baselines.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.