AI 服務暫時不可用，以下為來源正文，待恢復後補全翻譯。
[Submitted on 22 Sep 2026] Title:What Changes When Fact-Verification Scores Improve? Evidence and Answer Accounting Across Trained Verifiers and LLMs View a PDF of the paper titled What Changes When Fact-Verification Scores Improve? Evidence and Answer Accounting Across Trained Verifiers and LLMs, by Han Chen and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:A joint fact-verification score assesses answers and submitted evidence together. When the score improves, how much of the gain remains if the answers are held fixed? On FEVEROUS, strict score is the percentage of claims with a correct answer and a complete annotated evidence group in the submitted evidence. Across four trained DeBERTa checkpoints and 7,890 claims, replacing DCUF evidence with UnifEE evidence raises strict score by 9.61 percentage points, compared with 1.96 percentage points in answer accuracy. The paired 95% interval for the strict-score gain is [8.77, 10.43], conditional on these checkpoints. Replacing only the evidence passed to the scorer accounts for 7.92 or 9.08 percentage points when we retain the answers generated from DCUF or UnifEE evidence, respectively. To examine how this evidence gain depends on evaluation choices, we generate 470,400 responses from two 8B LLMs on FEVER, FEVEROUS, and SciFact under two answer formats and two context budgets. Increasing context from 256 to 2,048 tokens raises the fixed-answer evidence gain on FEVEROUS by 3.84 and 3.10 percentage points for Qwen and Llama, respectively. The effects fall short of the prespecified cross-dataset criterion, while some intervals extend beyond the two-point small-effect bound. Post-hoc analyses quantify changes in answers and submitted evidence, and show when aggregate accuracy and evidence-coverage rates miss the claim-level pattern. The four answer-evidence score combinations reveal changes that endpoint and aggregate metrics leave unresolved. Comments: 24 pages. Both authors contributed equally Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL) Cite as: arXiv:2609.27064 [cs.CL] (or arXiv:2609.27064v1 [cs.CL] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.27064 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Han Chen [view email] [v1] Tue, 22 Sep 2026 21:02:40 UTC (76 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled What Changes When Fact-Verification Scores Improve? Evidence and Answer Accounting Across Trained Verifiers and LLMs, by Han Chen and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CL new | recent | 2026-09 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Loading... Data provided by: Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)