Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

Know Your Source: A Public Knowledge Store for Media Background Checks

Benjamin Nichols, Michael Schlichtkrull, Nedjma Ousidhoum

Published

Jul 2, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 (Low)

Extraction confidence

35% (Low)

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Rater population

Not reported

Signals refreshed

Jul 2, 2026

Open arXiv Find implementation Shortlist (0) RSS feed

Tags

Automatic Metrics

Should you rely on this paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Human feedback signal
Not explicit
Not explicit in abstract metadata
Evaluation signal
Detected
Eval setup described
Usefulness for eval research
0/100
Adjacent candidate

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here

Human Eval Papers LLM-as-Judge Papers Pairwise Preference Papers Tool-Use Evaluation Search

Abstract

LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks. By grounding LLM outputs in retrieved evidence, RAG-based systems provide transparent justifications while allowing external information to be updated independently of the underlying model. However, existing approaches often assume retrieved evidence is reliable, although real-world information may be conflicting, outdated, and can originate from unreliable or biased sources. Recent work on *source-critical reasoning* addresses this challenge through media background checks (MBCs) (Schlichtkrull, 2024), which assess the credibility of evidence sources to support downstream fact verification. However, generating MBCs relies on costly proprietary search APIs, limiting reproducibility. To mitigate this issue, we introduce MEDIAREF, a publicly available knowledge store of web-sourced documents that enables reproducible, low-cost evaluation of MBC generation across 200 media sources. We describe a reproducible methodology for constructing and updating the collection, assess widely used LLMs on the MBC generation task, and demonstrate that MEDIAREF supports higher-quality MBC generation through both automatic and qualitative evaluation.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks."

Benchmarks and datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Human feedback details
Uses human feedback
No
Feedback types
None
Rater population
Not reported
Expertise required
General
Evaluation details
Evaluation modes
Automatic Metrics
Agentic eval
None
Quality controls
Not reported
Evidence quality
Low
Use this page as
Background context only

Research brief

Metadata summary

LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • LLM-based retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is increasingly used for automated fact-checking (AFC) and related tasks.
  • By grounding LLM outputs in retrieved evidence, RAG-based systems provide transparent justifications while allowing external information to be updated independently of the underlying model.
  • However, existing approaches often assume retrieved evidence is reliable, although real-world information may be conflicting, outdated, and can originate from unreliable or biased sources.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended queries

Contribution summary

  • To mitigate this issue, we introduce MEDIAREF, a publicly available knowledge store of web-sourced documents that enables reproducible, low-cost evaluation of MBC generation across 200 media sources.
  • We describe a reproducible methodology for constructing and updating the collection, assess widely used LLMs on the MBC generation task, and demonstrate that MEDIAREF supports higher-quality MBC generation through both automatic and…

Why it matters for eval

  • To mitigate this issue, we introduce MEDIAREF, a publicly available knowledge store of web-sourced documents that enables reproducible, low-cost evaluation of MBC generation across 200 media sources.
  • We describe a reproducible methodology for constructing and updating the collection, assess widely used LLMs on the MBC generation task, and demonstrate that MEDIAREF supports higher-quality MBC generation through both automatic and…

Researcher checklist

  • Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.