{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2024:HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ","short_pith_number":"pith:HKF57BXG","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"3a8bdf86e6668ba8bbf500af688b33725dcfc3f5d05e05c9d045ab9a804ff79b","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2410.15050","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Are LLMs Good Zero-Shot Fallacy Classifiers?","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Anh Tuan Luu, Fengjun Pan, Xiaobao Wu, Zongrui Li","submitted_at":"2024-10-19T09:38:55Z","abstract_excerpt":"Fallacies are defective arguments with faulty reasoning. Detecting and classifying them is a crucial NLP task to prevent misinformation, manipulative claims, and biased decisions. However, existing fallacy classifiers are limited by the requirement for sufficient labeled data for training, which hinders their out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization abilities. In this paper, we focus on leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) for zero-shot fallacy classification. To elicit fallacy-related knowledge and reasoning abilities of LLMs, we propose diverse single-round and multi-round prompting schem"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2410.15050","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CL","submitted_at":"2024-10-19T09:38:55Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"086ea3dea9e8afc38ca95db8a3f2e1e411f144d42072482f34e3855bade270f2","abstract_canon_sha256":"80516c365aa5a0665d4df629082462ae7478e24cabfe25e872c20297950c0fbd"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419728Z","signature_b64":"eRw0S+4wCT2tVEPs482zYopme4dwxoXEHXJms1ZdTASyY8Zpy2Oy9dJx+5XYhXgkHNetKOCIvvhMgpCSHbz3Cg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"3a8bdf86e6668ba8bbf500af688b33725dcfc3f5d05e05c9d045ab9a804ff79b","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419252Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419252Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Are LLMs Good Zero-Shot Fallacy Classifiers?","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Anh Tuan Luu, Fengjun Pan, Xiaobao Wu, Zongrui Li","submitted_at":"2024-10-19T09:38:55Z","abstract_excerpt":"Fallacies are defective arguments with faulty reasoning. Detecting and classifying them is a crucial NLP task to prevent misinformation, manipulative claims, and biased decisions. However, existing fallacy classifiers are limited by the requirement for sufficient labeled data for training, which hinders their out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization abilities. In this paper, we focus on leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) for zero-shot fallacy classification. To elicit fallacy-related knowledge and reasoning abilities of LLMs, we propose diverse single-round and multi-round prompting schem"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2410.15050","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2410.15050/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2410.15050","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2410.15050v1","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2410.15050","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"HKF57BXGM2F2","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"HKF57BXGM2F2RO7V","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"HKF57BXG","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2506.02546","citing_title":"To trust or not to trust: Attention-based Trust Management for LLM Multi-Agent Systems","ref_index":21,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ","json":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/HKF57BXG"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/HKF57BXG","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2410.15050&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/HKF57BXGM2F2RO7VACXWRCZTOJ/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T09:22:49.419307+00:00"}