Built independently by an author, for readers. Read the story and support ChapterPal

keyword

cite-worthy claims

Cite-worthy claims are specific factual assertions or propositions within a text that require external attribution or supporting evidence to substantiate their accuracy. Unlike statements of personal opinion, rhetorical remarks, conversational filler, or broadly accepted common knowledge, these claims present verifiable factual details, empirical findings, historical events, or domain-specific assertions whose truth value depends on external evidence. Identifying which claims are cite-worthy allows evaluators and information systems to determine precisely where verifiable sources must be attached, helping ensure traceability, prevent misinformation, and maintain factual reliability across technical, academic, and professional communication.

1 item

ExpertQA: Expert-Curated Questions and Attributed Answers

ExpertQA: Expert-Curated Questions and Attributed Answers

Chaitanya Malaviya, Subin Lee, Sihao Chen, Elizabeth Sieber, Mark Yatskar, Dan Roth

OrganizationsUniversity of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Washington

Why you should read this

Presents a high-quality benchmark of 2,177 domain-specific questions across 32 fields to evaluate the factuality and citation quality of language model responses through direct assessment and revision by verified domain experts.

As language models are adopted by a more sophisticated and diverse set of users, the importance of guaranteeing that they provide factually correct information supported by verifiable sources is critical across fields of study. This is especially the case for high-stakes fields, such as medicine and law, where the risk of propagating false information is high and can lead to undesirable societal consequences. Previous work studying attribution and factuality has not focused on analyzing these characteristics of language model outputs in domain-specific scenarios. In this work, we conduct human evaluation of responses from a few representative systems along various axes of attribution and factuality, by bringing domain experts in the loop. Specifically, we collect expert-curated questions from 484 participants across 32 fields of study, and then ask the same experts to evaluate generated responses to their own questions. In addition, we ask experts to improve upon responses from language models. The output of our analysis is ExpertQA, a high-quality long-form QA dataset with 2177 questions spanning 32 fields, along with verified answers and attributions for claims in the answers.1

Added

2026-09-26