The climate literature has grown faster than review teams can read it. That gap matters most for a concept like the environmental social tipping point, the threshold at which a small change triggers rapid, self-reinforcing change in a social system. Evidence of this kind of shift is usually contained in one or two paragraphs within a longer document. As a result, existing text mining tools-which categorize entire documents by topic or highlight isolated claims-leave an expanding set of important evidence without any systematic method for discovery or organization. This paper presents an open and modular transformer-based framework that detects and structures social tipping point evidence at the passage level. The framework joins five components into a single deployable workflow: a DistilBERT boundary splitter for segmentation, an iteratively augmented RoBERTa classifier for detection, a Mistral 7B model that rewrites each detected passage for clarity, a LLaMA 3.2 3B model that rates the passage against five published social tipping point criteria, and a Milvus vector store for semantic retrieval. The system is wrapped in a Streamlit interface backed by MinIO object storage. Evaluated on a 163-passage benchmark labelled by GPT-4.1 and a 51-passage set reviewed by experts, the splitter surpassed three competing methods on a nine-metric composite score (6.137). The tuned RoBERTa model achieved 71.4 percent accuracy with a Cohen's kappa of 0.337 on the full benchmark, and 87.5 percent accuracy with a kappa of 0.742 on passages with labels, outperforming both a climate-focused model and untuned language models.
News media play a central role in shaping public perceptions of climate change, and whether coverage emphasizes threats or solutions has measurable effects on audience engagement and policy support. Automated detection of these framing patterns at the sentence level would allow researchers to analyze large corpora that are infeasible to code manually. We present a systematic comparison of two approaches for classifying sentences from German-language climate news articles as threat-oriented, solution-oriented, both, or neither. The first approach uses few-shot prompting with an open-weights large language model (Llama 4 Maverick), employing chain-of-thought reasoning and structured output with confidence scoring. The second approach fine-tunes a German BERT model (deepset/gbert-large) for sentence-pair classification, where the preceding sentence provides contextual information for the target sentence. Both approaches implement two independent binary classifiers, one for threat framing and one for solution framing. We evaluate both methods on a corpus of 440 Austrian newspaper articles that were manually coded following a detailed coding scheme developed with domain experts. The fine-tuned BERT classifiers achieve an F1 score of 0.83 for both the threat and solution tasks, while the LLM-based classifiers reach an F1 of 0.78. An ablation study confirms that providing the preceding sentence as context improves BERT classification performance substantially compared to single-sentence input. These results contribute to the growing body of work comparing fine-tuned encoder models with prompted generative models for text classification in computational social science.
Knowledge graphs over corpora of inter-referencing documents - scholarly papers, legal opinions, policy briefs - encode the topology of reference but not its stance. The standard representation collapses a rich evaluative relation into an untyped edge, losing the very content that supports community-level queries about how one document is received by another. We propose the claim network: a representational pattern in which each cross-document reference is reified as a typed claim, carrying source, target, claim text, and a four-class stance label grounded in the citation-intent literature. We give a construction pipeline applicable to any corpus of scholarly inter-referencing documents and instantiate it on a corpus of 127 papers in 3D point cloud semantic segmentation, producing a network of 8,260 typed claims. Three downstream task families demonstrate what the network enables: retrieval signal augmentation, aggregated-stance summarisation, and topological analytics. Head-to-head evaluation against standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) baselines shows that the gain over flat retrieval is the gain from the right intermediate representation rather than the wrong one.
Ning Ding, Sergio J. Rodríguez Méndez, Pouya G. Omran
With the surge of online misinformation, Large Language Models (LLMs) and Reasoning Large Language Models (RLMs) serving as Automatic Fact-Checking (AFC) systems have emerged as a prominent paradigm for reliable, explainable verification. However, our empirical study reveals that this paradigm faces a critical risk asymmetry challenge when deployed in the real world under resource-constrained environments. While Hotspot Perception Ability (HPA), the capacity to dynamically allocate reasoning resources based on social impact, is essential to mitigate this risk, existing benchmarks lack the social metadata and evaluation framework to meet this urgent evaluation needs, thereby hindering the advancement of these AFC systems. To bridge this gap, we introduce TrendFact, the first benchmark capable of evaluating HPA and three fact-checking tasks. It consists of 7,643 curated samples sourced from trending platforms and professional datasets, with an evidence library containing 366,634 entries. To enable HPA assessment, we propose two novel metrics: the Explanation Consistency Score (ECS) to evaluate the reliability of verification reasoning, and the Hotspot Claim Perception Index (HCPI) to quantify the overall HPA of AFC systems. Extensive experiments demonstrate that existing AFC systems exhibit limited performance on TrendFact. Furthermore, our proposed FactISR framework effectively enhances HPA and computational efficiency for RLMs-served AFC systems.