Web domain credibility evaluation is vital for combating misinformation. It is conducted by examining factors such as domain type, transparency, and overall reputation. However, assessing the credibility of newly emerging web domains remains challenging since they have no reputation yet. Expert fact-checkers evaluate the credibility of domains by analyzing the content of their articles, including the presence of misinformation, bias, or propaganda. Yet, the ease of large-scale content generation enabled by LLMs has accelerated the creation of new content, rendering manual assessment insufficient and underscoring the need for automated approaches to domain credibility evaluation. In this paper, we introduce our Domain Credibility Evaluation Framework (DCEF), a temporal framework for domain credibility evaluation grounded in expert ratings. DCEF enables us to investigate whether the credibility of web domains can be assessed from their published articles following the workflow of expert fact-checkers, without any prior knowledge of the source domains themselves.

The field of explainable Automatic Fact-Checking (AFC) aims to enhance the transparency and trustworthiness of automated fact verification systems by providing clear and comprehensible explanations. However, the effectiveness of these explanations depends ontheir actionability—the extent to which an AFC explanation pinpoints the error, supplies the correct fact, and backs it with sources. Despiteactionability being critical for high-quality explanations, no prior research has proposed a method to evaluate it. This paper introducesFinGrAct, a fine-grained evaluation framework that can access the web and is designed to assess actionability in AFC explanations through well-defined criteria. We also introduce a novel dataset to evaluate actionability in AFC explanations. FinGrAct surpasses state-of-the-art (SOTA) evaluators, achieving the highest Pearson and Kendall correlation with human judgments while demonstrating the lowest egocentricbias, making it a more robust evaluation approach for actionability evaluation in AFC.

Automated Fact-Checking (AFC) is the automated verification of claim accuracy. AFC is crucial in discerning truth from misinformation, especially given the huge amounts of content are generated online daily. Current research focuses on predicting claim veracity through metadata analysis and language scrutiny, with an emphasis on justifying verdicts. This paper surveys recent methodologies, proposinga comprehensive taxonomy and presenting the evolution of research in that landscape. A comparative analysis of methodologies and futuredirections for improving fact-checking explainability are also discussed.