An Explainable Coherence Score for Detecting Temporal Inconsistencies in Political News
Abstract
Temporal inconsistencies, such as mandates attributed outside their real interval, events presented as past before they occurred, or inverted causal sequences, are a form of political disinformation that evades style-based fake news detectors: a well-written article with a single wrong date carries no lexical signal of falsehood. This paper introduces the Temporal Coherence Score (TCS), a continuous, intrinsically interpretable metric that quantifies the temporal coherence of a news article, computed by a four-stage pipeline: extraction of temporal facts, construction of a temporal knowledge graph, hierarchical verification against internal consistency rules and external reference sources, and score aggregation with automatically generated explanations. Verification combines eight internal checkers derived from Allen's interval algebra with a five-level external hierarchy ranging from a locally stored reference knowledge base of 1{,}256 curated political facts to live Wikidata SPARQL queries. On a benchmark of 100 political news articles with injected temporal errors, the system reaches a precision of 0.909 at the selected operating threshold, with a single residual false positive, a profile deliberately tuned for human-in-the-loop fact-checking assistance, where false alarms are costlier than missed detections. Unlike lexical baselines that output only a binary label, every flagged article is accompanied by the inconsistency type, the entities involved, and the reference source that contradicts the claim.
Figures & tables
| Code | Illustrative example |
|---|---|
| V1 | Article states Blair FOLLOWED Brown, and separately Brown FOLLOWED Blair — a cycle |
| V2 | A resignation dated before the scandal that caused it becomes public |
| V3 | A mandate spanning 95 years, exceeding plausible tenure |
| V4 | Two different entities both stated to hold “President” on the same date |
| V5 | A minister acting in office weeks before the confirming election |
| V6 | A 2030 policy referenced as already completed in a 2024 article |
| Code | Domain / data source | New incons.? |
|---|---|---|
| V1–V8 | Internal TKG structure (cycles, ordering, contradictions, overlaps); in-memory graph | Yes |
| L1 | Reference mandates and canonical events; local file | Yes |
| L2 | Facts verified in prior articles; Neo4j (local) | Yes |
| L3 | Mandates and events from Wikidata; external SPARQL | Yes |
| L4 | Wikipedia verification (disabled in production); external REST | — |
| L5 | Confirmation from recent news feeds; external RSS | No (confirm only) |
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Precision | 0.909 |
| Recall | 0.227 |
| F1 score | 0.364 |
| Accuracy | 0.650 |
| Predicted TRUE | Predicted FAKE | |
|---|---|---|
| Actual TRUE (56) | 55 | 1 |
| Actual FAKE (44) | 34 | 10 |
| Configuration | P | R | F1 | FP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline verification | 0.714 | 0.227 | 0.345 | 4 |
| Extended tol. + cross-entity | 0.667 | 0.273 | 0.387 | 6 |
| Role-category grouping | 0.706 | 0.273 | 0.393 | 5 |
| FP correction ( ) | 0.900 | 0.205 | 0.333 | 1 |
| Final ( ) | 0.909 | 0.227 | 0.364 | 1 |
| Model | Precision | Recall | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Logistic Regression | 0.783 | 0.181 | 0.280 |
| Linear SVM | 0.777 | 0.436 | 0.535 |
| Random Forest | 0.701 | 0.500 | 0.572 |
| Proposed (TCS, ) | 0.909 | 0.227 | 0.364 |
Automated Fact-Checking
Automated fact-checking detects checkable claims, retrieves evidence, and assesses whether that evidence supports or refutes them.
See all 136 papers