Complex claim verification requires decomposing sentences into verifiable subclaims, yet existing methods struggle to align decomposition quality with verification performance. We propose a reinforcement learning (RL) approach that jointly optimizes decomposition quality and verifier alignment using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Our method integrates: (i) structured sequential reasoning; (ii) supervised finetuning on teacher-distilled exemplars; and (iii) a multi-objective reward balancing format compliance, verifier alignment, and decomposition quality. Across six evaluation settings, our trained 8B decomposer improves downstream verification performance to 71.75% macro-F1, outperforming prompt-based approaches (+1.99, +6.24) and existing RL methods (+5.84). Human evaluation confirms the high quality of the generated subclaims. Our framework enables smaller language models to achieve state-of-the-art claim verification by jointly optimising for verification accuracy and decomposition.

Mitigating entity bias is a critical challenge in Relation Extraction (RE), where models often rely excessively on entities, resulting in poor generalization. This paper presents a novel approach to address this issue by adapting a Variational Information Bottleneck (VIB) framework. Our method compresses entity-specific information while preserving task-relevant features. It achieves state-of-the-art performance on both general and financial domain RE datasets, excelling in in-domain settings (original test sets) and out-of-domain (modified test sets with type-constrained entity replacements). Our approach offers a robust, interpretable, and theoretically grounded methodology.

We introduce FinNLI, a benchmark dataset for Financial Natural Language Inference (FinNLI) across diverse financial texts like SEC Filings, Annual Reports, and Earnings Call transcripts. Our dataset framework ensures diverse premise-hypothesis pairs while minimizing spurious correlations. FinNLI comprises 21,304 pairs, including a high-quality test set of 3,304 instances annotated by finance experts. Evaluations show that domain shift significantly degrades general-domain NLI performance. The highest Macro F1 scores for pre-trained (PLMs) and large language models (LLMs) baselines are 74.57% and 78.62%, respectively, highlighting the dataset’s difficulty. Surprisingly, instruction-tuned financial LLMs perform poorly, suggesting limited generalizability. FinNLI exposes weaknesses in current LLMs for financial reasoning, indicating room for improvement.

Online misinformation remains a critical challenge, and fact-checkers increasingly rely on claim matching systems that use sentence embedding models to retrieve relevant fact-checks. However, as users interact with claims online, they often introduce edits, and it remains unclear whether current embedding models used in retrieval are robust to such edits. To investigate this, we introduce a perturbation framework that generates valid and natural claim variations, enabling us to assess the robustness of a wide-range of sentence embedding models in a multi-stage retrieval pipeline and evaluate the effectiveness of various mitigation approaches. Our evaluation reveals that standard embedding models exhibit notable performance drops on edited claims, while LLM-distilled embedding models offer improved robustness at a higher computational cost. Although a strong reranker helps to reduce the performance drop, it cannot fully compensate for first-stage retrieval gaps. To address these retrieval gaps, we evaluate train- and inference-time mitigation approaches, demonstrating that they can improve in-domain robustness by up to 17 percentage points and boost out-of-domain generalization by 10 percentage points. Overall, our findings provide practical improvements to claim-matching systems, enabling more reliable fact-checking of evolving misinformation.