The questionable responses caused by knowledge hallucination may lead to LLMs' unstable ability in decision-making. However, it has never been investigated whether the LLMs' hallucination is possibly usable to generate negative reasoning for facilitating the detection of fake news. This study proposes a novel supervised self-reinforced reasoning rectification approach - SR$^3$ that yields both common reasonable reasoning and wrong understandings (negative reasoning) for news via LLMs reflection for semantic consistency learning. Upon that, we construct a negative reasoning-based news learning model called - \emph{NRFE}, which leverages positive or negative news-reasoning pairs for learning the semantic consistency between them. To avoid the impact of label-implicated reasoning, we deploy a student model - \emph{NRFE-D} that only takes news content as input to inspect the performance of our method by distilling the knowledge from \emph{NRFE}. The experimental results verified on three popular fake news datasets demonstrate the superiority of our method compared with three kinds of baselines including prompting on LLMs, fine-tuning on pre-trained SLMs, and other representative fake news detection methods.

Prototype-based classification learning methods are known to be inherently interpretable. However, this paradigm suffers from major limitations compared to deep models, such as lower performance. This led to the development of the so-called deep Prototype-Based Networks (PBNs), also known as prototypical parts models. In this work, we analyze these models with respect to different properties, including interpretability. In particular, we focus on the Classification-by-Components (CBC) approach, which uses a probabilistic model to ensure interpretability and can be used as a shallow or deep architecture. We show that this model has several shortcomings, like creating contradicting explanations. Based on these findings, we propose an extension of CBC that solves these issues. Moreover, we prove that this extension has robustness guarantees and derive a loss that optimizes robustness. Additionally, our analysis shows that most (deep) PBNs are related to (deep) RBF classifiers, which implies that our robustness guarantees generalize to shallow RBF classifiers. The empirical evaluation demonstrates that our deep PBN yields state-of-the-art classification accuracy on different benchmarks while resolving the interpretability shortcomings of other approaches. Further, our shallow PBN variant outperforms other shallow PBNs while being inherently interpretable and exhibiting provable robustness guarantees.

An open challenge in recent machine learning is about how to improve the reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs) in a black-box setting, i.e., without access to detailed information such as output token probabilities. Existing approaches either rely on accessibility (which is often unrealistic) or involve significantly increased train- and inference-time costs. This paper addresses those limitations or shortcomings by proposing a novel approach, namely CoBB (Correct for improving QA reasoning of Black-Box LLMs). It uses a trained adaptation model to perform a seq2seq mapping from the often-imperfect reasonings of the original black-box LLM to the correct or improved reasonings. Specifically, the adaptation model is initialized with a relatively small open-source LLM and adapted over a collection of sub-sampled training pairs. To select the representative pairs of correct and incorrect reasonings, we formulated the dataset construction as an optimization problem that minimizes the statistical divergence between the sampled subset and the entire collection, and solved it via a genetic algorithm. We then train the adaptation model over the sampled pairs by contrasting the likelihoods of correct and incorrect reasonings. Our experimental results demonstrate that CoBB significantly improves reasoning accuracy across various QA benchmarks, compared to the best-performing adaptation baselines.