2020
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2005.13691
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Challenges in Combating COVID-19 Infodemic -- Data, Tools, and Ethics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Machine learning techniques have also been adapted to detect misinformation. The work in [35] discussed the challenges in designing and developing an AI solutions for infodemic detection. Moreover, authors presented a tool to estimate whether an article is a misinformation based on URL checker, fake news classifier, and website matcher.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Machine learning techniques have also been adapted to detect misinformation. The work in [35] discussed the challenges in designing and developing an AI solutions for infodemic detection. Moreover, authors presented a tool to estimate whether an article is a misinformation based on URL checker, fake news classifier, and website matcher.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 Logistic Regression: a statistical technique that aims to produce a model that allows the prediction of values taken by a categorical variable. 4 Naive Bayes: family of simple "probabilistic classifiers" based on the application of the Bayes' theorem. 5 API : set of routines and programming patterns for accessing Twitter's own software or web-based platform.…”
Section: Pythonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of this work is related to contenders promoted on the Kaggle platform 1 . Some authors like [4] and [2] use the term infodemic to describe this phenomenon of fake news about the coronavirus. Some social networks, like Twitter and Facebook, have released tools to combat fake news.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The study by (Pulido et al 2020) analyzed 1,000 tweets and categorized them based on factuality: (i) False information, (ii) Sciencebased evidence, (iii) Fact-checking tweets, (iv) Mixed information, (v) Facts, (vi) Facts, (vii) Other, and (viii) Not valid. Finally, Ding et al (2020) have a position paper discussing the challenges in combating the COVID-19 infodemic in terms of data, tools, and ethics. See also a recent survey by Shuja et al (2020).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%