Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Mark Rothermel

dblp:366/7308 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
3 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 51% Information extraction and text analysis · 38% Vision and language · 11%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › fact-checking
multimodal fact-checking
1.222026
DEFAME: Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts · ICML 2025
VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checking · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › fact-checking
automated fact-checking
1.012026
VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checking · ACL (1) 2026
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
dynamic benchmark
1.012026
VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checking · ACL (1) 2026
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
fact-checking
0.912025
DEFAME: Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts · ICML 2025
Computer vision › Vision and language › vision-language model
multimodal large language model
0.912025
DEFAME: Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts · ICML 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
concept-based explanation
0.812024
Interpretable Concept Bottlenecks to Align Reinforcement Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
concept bottleneck model
0.812024
Interpretable Concept Bottlenecks to Align Reinforcement Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
explainable reinforcement learning
0.812024
Interpretable Concept Bottlenecks to Align Reinforcement Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
Interpretable Concept Bottlenecks to Align Reinforcement Learning Agents · NeurIPS 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

large language model · 1.0automated annotation pipeline · 1.0retrieval-augmented generation · 0.9multimodal large language model · 0.9concept bottleneck layer · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 VeriTaS: The First Dynamic Benchmark for Multimodal Automated Fact-Checking
abstract
The growing scale of online misinformation urgently demands Automated Fact-Checking (AFC). Existing benchmarks for evaluating AFC systems, however, are largely limited in terms of task scope, modalities, domain, language diversity, realism, or coverage of misinformation types. Critically, they are static, thus subject to data leakage as their claims enter the pretraining corpora of LLMs. As a result, benchmark performance no longer reliably reflects the actual ability to verify claims.We introduce Verified Theses and Statements (VeriTaS), the first dynamic benchmark for multimodal AFC, designed to remain robust under ongoing large-scale pretraining of foundation models. VeriTaS currently comprises 25,000 real-world claims from 104 professional fact-checking organizations across 54 languages, covering textual and audiovisual content. Claims are added quarterly via a fully automated seven-stage pipeline that normalizes claim formulation, retrieves original media, and maps heterogeneous expert verdicts to a novel, standardized, and disentangled scoring scheme with textual justifications.Through human evaluation, we demonstrate that the automated annotations closely match human judgments.We commit to updating VeriTaS in the future, establishing a leakage-resistant benchmark, supporting meaningful AFC evaluation in the era of rapidly evolving foundation models.The code and data are publicly available under https://veritas.mai.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de.
Mark Rothermel, Marcus Kornmann, Marcus Rohrbach, Anna Rohrbach
ACL (1)1
2025 DEFAME: Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts
abstract
The proliferation of disinformation demands reliable and scalable fact-checking solutions. We present Dynamic Evidence-based FAct-checking with Multimodal Experts (DEFAME), a modular, zero-shot MLLM pipeline for open-domain, text-image claim verification. DEFAME operates in a six-stage process, dynamically selecting the tools and search depth to extract and evaluate textual and visual evidence. Unlike prior approaches that are text-only, lack explainability, or rely solely on parametric knowledge, DEFAME performs end-to-end verification, accounting for images in claims and evidence while generating structured, multimodal reports. Evaluation on the popular benchmarks VERITE, AVeriTeC, and MOCHEG shows that DEFAME surpasses all previous methods, establishing itself as the new general state-of-the-art fact-checking system for uni- and multimodal fact-checking. Moreover, we introduce a new multimodal benchmark, ClaimReview2024+, featuring claims after the knowledge cutoff of GPT-4o, avoiding data leakage. Here, DEFAME drastically outperforms the GPT-4o baselines, showing temporal generalizability and the potential for real-time fact-checking.
Tobias Braun, Mark Rothermel, Marcus Rohrbach, Anna Rohrbach
ICML2
2024 Interpretable Concept Bottlenecks to Align Reinforcement Learning Agents
abstract
Goal misalignment, reward sparsity and difficult credit assignment are only a few of the many issues that make it difficult for deep reinforcement learning (RL) agents to learn optimal policies. Unfortunately, the black-box nature of deep neural networks impedes the inclusion of domain experts for inspecting the model and revising suboptimal policies. To this end, we introduce Successive Concept Bottleneck Agents (SCoBots), that integrate consecutive concept bottleneck (CB) layers. In contrast to current CB models, SCoBots do not just represent concepts as properties of individual objects, but also as relations between objects which is crucial for many RL tasks. Our experimental results provide evidence of SCoBots' competitive performances, but also of their potential for domain experts to understand and regularize their behavior. Among other things, SCoBots enabled us to identify a previously unknown misalignment problem in the iconic video game, Pong, and resolve it. Overall, SCoBots thus result in more human-aligned RL agents.
Quentin Delfosse, Sebastian Sztwiertnia, Mark Rothermel, Wolfgang Stammer, Kristian Kersting
NeurIPS3