Fact verification constitutes a pivotal application in the effort to combat the dissemination of disinformation, a concern that has recently garnered considerable attention. However, previous studies in the field of fact verification, particularly those focused on question-answering dialogue, have exhibited limitations, such as failing to fully exploit the potential of question structures and ignoring relevant label information during the verification process. In this paper, we introduce Label-Infused Iterative Information Interacting (LI4), a novel approach designed for the task of question-answering dialogue based fact verification. LI4 consists of two meticulously designed components, namely the Iterative Information Refining and Filtering Module (IIRF) and the Fact Label Embedding Module (FLEM). The IIRF uses the Interactive Gating Mechanism to iteratively filter out the noise of question and evidence, concurrently refining the claim information. The FLEM is conceived to strengthen the understanding ability of the model towards labels by injecting label knowledge. We evaluate the performance of the proposed LI4 on HEALTHVER, FAVIQ, and COLLOQUIAL. The experimental results confirm that our LI4 model attains remarkable progress, manifesting as a new state-of-the-art performance.

Enhancing the attribution in large language models (LLMs) is a crucial task. One feasible approach is to enable LLMs to cite external sources that support their generations. However, existing datasets and evaluation methods in this domain still exhibit notable limitations. In this work, we formulate the task of attributed query-focused summarization (AQFS) and present WebCiteS, a Chinese dataset featuring 7k human-annotated summaries with citations. WebCiteS derives from real-world user queries and web search results, offering a valuable resource for model training and evaluation. Prior works in attribution evaluation do not differentiate between groundedness errors and citation errors. They also fall short in automatically verifying sentences that draw partial support from multiple sources. We tackle these issues by developing detailed metrics and enabling the automatic evaluator to decompose the sentences into sub-claims for fine-grained verification. Our comprehensive evaluation of both open-source and proprietary models on WebCiteS highlights the challenge LLMs face in correctly citing sources, underscoring the necessity for further improvement. The dataset and code will be open-sourced to facilitate further research in this crucial field.