climate-fever-eval
Uncertainty-Aware Web-Conditioned Scientific Fact-Checking — Vinod et al. (2026) (arXiv:2604.11036, 2026)
What this evaluates
This evaluation probes a model's ability to verify scientific claims in a binary classification setting, specifically testing out-of-domain generalization. It measures performance on Supported vs. Refuted labels, emphasizing robustness when applied to climate-related claims outside the training distribution.
Datasets
- CLIMATE-FEVER — total ?; splits: test (-1)
Metrics
Balanced Accuracy(primary) — range: percent- Average of recall obtained on each class: (TPR + TNR) / 2. Computed for the Supported and Refuted classes.
F1 (Supports)— range: percent- Harmonic mean of precision and recall for the Supported class: 2 * (Precision * Recall) / (Precision + Recall).
Recall (Supports)— range: percent- True positive rate for the Supported class: TP / (TP + FN).
Input / output format
Input: Scientific claim paired with context (local evidence snippets or retrieved web documents).
Output: A single verification label: 'Supported' or 'Refuted'.
Scoring recipe
def compute_climate_fever_metrics(preds, golds):
tp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, golds) if p == 'Supported' and g == 'Supported')
fn = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, golds) if p == 'Refuted' and g == 'Supported')
fp = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, golds) if p == 'Supported' and g == 'Refuted')
tn = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, golds) if p == 'Refuted' and g == 'Refuted')
tpr = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0
tnr = tn / (tn + fp) if (tn + fp) > 0 else 0
bal_acc = (tpr + tnr) / 2
prec = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0
f1 = 2 * (prec * tpr) / (prec + tpr) if (prec + tpr) > 0 else 0
return bal_acc, f1, tpr
Common pitfalls
- Confusing the 2-way (Supported/Refuted) and 3-way (Supported/Refuted/NEI) evaluation regimes, as different datasets use different label sets.
- Reporting standard accuracy instead of Balanced Accuracy, which fails to account for class imbalance in datasets like CLIMATE-FEVER.
- Aggregating per-atom predictions using simple majority vote instead of the calibrated judge, which causes a ~14.6 F1 drop on BIONLI-300.
Evidence (verbatim from paper)
Table 2. Main results. Balanced Accuracy, Recall, and F1 on BIONLI-300; Macro-F1 on PubMedFact1k; and Balanced Accuracy, Recall (Supports), and F1 (Supports) on CLIMATE-FEVER, evaluated only on the Supported/Refuted subsets.
Citation
@misc{vinod2026uncertainty,
title={Uncertainty-Aware Web-Conditioned Scientific Fact-Checking},
author={Vinod et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2604.11036}
}
- arXiv: 2604.11036