Verifying scientific claims presents a significantly greater challenge than verifying political or news-related claims. Unlike the relatively broad audience for political claims, the users of scientific claim verification systems can vary widely, ranging from researchers testing specific hypotheses to everyday users seeking information on a medication. Additionally, the evidence for scientific claims is often highly complex, involving technical terminology and intricate domain-specific concepts that require specialized models for accurate verification. Despite considerable interest from the research community, there is a noticeable lack of large-scale scientific claim verification datasets to benchmark and train effective models. To bridge this gap, we introduce two large-scale datasets, SciClaimHunt and SciClaimHunt_Num, derived from scientific research papers. We propose several baseline models tailored for scientific claim verification to assess the effectiveness of these datasets. Additionally, we evaluate models trained on SciClaimHunt and SciClaimHunt_Num against existing scientific claim verification datasets to gauge their quality and reliability. Furthermore, we conduct human evaluations of the claims in proposed datasets and perform error analysis to assess the effectiveness of the proposed baseline models. Our findings indicate that SciClaimHunt and SciClaimHunt_Num serve as highly reliable resources for training models in scientific claim verification.

The constant shifts in social and political contexts, driven by emerging social movements and political events, lead to new forms of hate content and previously unrecognized hate patterns that machine learning models may not have captured. Some recent literature proposes the data augmentation-based techniques to enrich existing hate datasets by incorporating samples that reveal new implicit hate patterns. This approach aims to improve the model's performance on out-of-domain implicit hate instances. It is observed, that further addition of more samples for augmentation results in the decrease of the performance of the model. In this work, we propose a Knowledge Transfer-driven Concept Refinement method that distills and refines the concepts related to implicit hate samples through novel prototype alignment and concept losses, alongside data augmentation based on concept activation vectors. Experiments with several publicly available datasets show that incorporating additional implicit samples reflecting new hate patterns through concept refinement enhances the model's performance, surpassing baseline results while maintaining cross-dataset generalization capabilities.\footnote{DISCLAIMER: This paper contains explicit statements that are potentially offensive.}