Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This study challenges the assumption that increasing neural network complexity yields stable performance gains in health misinformation detection, demonstrating instead that benchmark construction and data leakage controls often dictate results more than architecture choice. The findings indicate that simple sparse linear models can remain highly competitive against deep ensembles across different corpora, suggesting a need for evidence-driven model selection over default reliance on complex structures.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Does Neural Complexity Improve Health Misinformation Detection? A Leakage-Controlled Cross-Corpus Benchmark

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.04636v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Increasing architectural complexity is often assumed to improve health misinformation detection, yet reported gains are difficult to interpret when studies use different corpora, preprocessing pipelines, data splits, and leakage controls. This study provides a controlled cross-corpus benchmark of five compact neural architectures (1D-CNN, LSTM, BiLSTM, CNN-LSTM, and CNN-BiLSTM), a soft-voting neural ensemble, and three classical machine-learning baselines using COVID19-FNIR and CONSTRAINT. Exact-text duplicate controls were applied before modelling; all neural systems used a common preprocessing and optimisation protocol, and neural results were repeated across three random seeds. On COVID19-FNIR, the deep ensemble achieved a mean macro-F1 of 0.9963 and ROC-AUC of 0.9994, while individual neural models ranged from 0.9945 to 0.9957 macro-F1. On CONSTRAINT, the ensemble achieved macro-F1 of 0.9272 and ROC-AUC of 0.9811, whereas a linear SVM achieved macro-F1 of 0.9574 and ROC-AUC of 0.9931. Architecture rankings changed across corpora, and simple sparse linear models remained highly competitive. The findings show that model complexity does not provide a stable performance advantage and that benchmark construction can dominate architecture choice. The study contributes a reproducible, leakage-controlled basis for evidence-driven model selection in health misinformation classification

Important: e-prints posted on arXiv are not peer-reviewed by arXiv; they should not be relied upon without context to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information without consulting multiple experts in the field.

Title:Does Neural Complexity Improve Health Misinformation Detection? A Leakage-Controlled Cross-Corpus Benchmark

Abstract:Increasing architectural complexity is often assumed to improve health misinformation detection, yet reported gains are difficult to interpret when studies use different corpora, preprocessing pipelines, data splits, and leakage controls. This study provides a controlled cross-corpus benchmark of five compact neural architectures (1D-CNN, LSTM, BiLSTM, CNN-LSTM, and CNN-BiLSTM), a soft-voting neural ensemble, and three classical machine-learning baselines using COVID19-FNIR and CONSTRAINT. Exact-text duplicate controls were applied before modelling; all neural systems used a common preprocessing and optimisation protocol, and neural results were repeated across three random seeds. On COVID19-FNIR, the deep ensemble achieved a mean macro-F1 of 0.9963 and ROC-AUC of 0.9994, while individual neural models ranged from 0.9945 to 0.9957 macro-F1. On CONSTRAINT, the ensemble achieved macro-F1 of 0.9272 and ROC-AUC of 0.9811, whereas a linear SVM achieved macro-F1 of 0.9574 and ROC-AUC of 0.9931. Architecture rankings changed across corpora, and simple sparse linear models remained highly competitive. The findings show that model complexity does not provide a stable performance advantage and that benchmark construction can dominate architecture choice. The study contributes a reproducible, leakage-controlled basis for evidence-driven model selection in health misinformation classification

18 pages, 3 tables. Reproducibility materials and source code are available from the author

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2610.04636 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2610.04636v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.04636 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 351 words

Related coverage