Truth discovery is to resolve conflicts and find the truth from multiple-source statements. Conventional methods mostly research based on the mutual effect between the reliability of sources and the credibility of statements, however, pay no attention to the mutual effect among the credibility of statements about the same object. We propose memory network based models to incorporate these two ideas to do the truth discovery. We use feedforward memory network and feedback memory network to learn the representation of the credibility of statements which are about the same object. Specially, we adopt memory mechanism to learn source reliability and use it through truth prediction. During learning models, we use multiple types of data (categorical data and continuous data) by assigning different weights automatically in the loss function based on their own effect on truth discovery prediction. The experiment results show that the memory network based models much outperform the state-of-the-art method and other baseline methods.
The Bayesian based methods apply Bayesian analysis, which are to predict the probability of a statement to be a truth based on observed information. The corresponding methods include TruthFinder @cite_22 , AccuPr @cite_9 , AccuSim @cite_9 , AccuFormat @cite_9 , LCA @cite_23 and CRH @cite_4 . Specially, TruthFinder method considers similarity between statements, and AccuPr method consider that different statements on the same entry should be disjoint. LCA method is a probabilistic model which analyze latent credibility factors by using them as parameters to find the maximum a posteriori (MAP). CRH method @cite_4 use heterogeneous types of data which consists categorical data and continuous data to estimate the reliability of sources and predict truth. The copying affected method discounts votes from copied observations through computing credibility, such as AccuCopy @cite_9 .
@cite_9 @cite_4 @cite_22 @cite_23
2073545563 2118388899 1713409046
Many data management applications, such as setting up Web portals, managing enterprise data, managing community data, and sharing scientific data, require integrating data from multiple sources. Each of these sources provides a set of values and different sources can often provide conflicting values. To present quality data to users, it is critical that data integration systems can resolve conflicts and discover true values. Typically, we expect a true value to be provided by more sources than any particular false one, so we can take the value provided by the majority of the sources as the truth. Unfortunately, a false value can be spread through copying and that makes truth discovery extremely tricky. In this paper, we consider how to find true values from conflicting information when there are a large number of sources, among which some may copy from others. We present a novel approach that considers dependence between data sources in truth discovery. Intuitively, if two data sources provide a large number of common values and many of these values are rarely provided by other sources (e.g., particular false values), it is very likely that one copies from the other. We apply Bayesian analysis to decide dependence between sources and design an algorithm that iteratively detects dependence and discovers truth from conflicting information. We also extend our model by considering accuracy of data sources and similarity between values. Our experiments on synthetic data as well as real-world data show that our algorithm can significantly improve accuracy of truth discovery and is scalable when there are a large number of data sources. The World Wide Web has become the most important information source for most of us. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee for the correctness of information on the Web. Moreover, different websites often provide conflicting information on a subject, such as different specifications for the same product. In this paper, we propose a new problem, called Veracity, i.e., conformity to truth, which studies how to find true facts from a large amount of conflicting information on many subjects that is provided by various websites. We design a general framework for the Veracity problem and invent an algorithm, called TRUTHFlNDER, which utilizes the relationships between websites and their information, i.e., a website is trustworthy if it provides many pieces of true information, and a piece of information is likely to be true if it is provided by many trustworthy websites. An iterative method is used to infer the trustworthiness of websites and the correctness of information from each other. Our experiments show that TRUTHFlNDER successfully finds true facts among conflicting information and identifies trustworthy websites better than the popular search engines. A frequent problem when dealing with data gathered from multiple sources on the web (ranging from booksellers to Wikipedia pages to stock analyst predictions) is that these sources disagree, and we must decide which of their (often mutually exclusive) claims we should accept. Current state-of-the-art information credibility algorithms known as "fact-finders" are transitive voting systems with rules specifying how votes iteratively flow from sources to claims and then back to sources. While this is quite tractable and often effective, fact-finders also suffer from substantial limitations; in particular, a lack of transparency obfuscates their credibility decisions and makes them difficult to adapt and analyze: knowing the mechanics of how votes are calculated does not readily tell us what those votes mean, and finding, for example, that a source has a score of 6 is not informative. We introduce a new approach to information credibility, Latent Credibility Analysis (LCA), constructing strongly principled, probabilistic models where the truth of each claim is a latent variable and the credibility of a source is captured by a set of model parameters. This gives LCA models clear semantics and modularity that make extending them to capture additional observed and latent credibility factors straightforward. Experiments over four real-world datasets demonstrate that LCA models can outperform the best fact-finders in both unsupervised and semi-supervised settings.