For socially sensitive tasks like hate speech detection, the quality of explanations from Large Language Models (LLMs) is crucial for factors like user trust and model alignment. While Persona prompting (PP) is increasingly used as a way to steer model towards user-specific generation, its effect on model rationales remains underexplored. We investigate how LLM-generated rationales vary when conditioned on different simulated demographic personas. Using datasets annotated with word-level rationales, we measure agreement with human annotations from different demographic groups, and assess the impact of PP on model bias and human alignment. Our evaluation across three LLMs results reveals three key findings: (1) PP improving classification on the most subjective task (hate speech) but degrading rationale quality. (2) Simulated personas fail to align with their real-world demographic counterparts, and high inter-persona agreement shows models are resistant to significant steering. (3) Models exhibit consistent demographic biases and a strong tendency to over-flag content as harmful, regardless of PP. Our findings reveal a critical trade-off: while PP can improve classification in socially-sensitive tasks, it often comes at the cost of rationale quality and fails to mitigate underlying biases, urging caution in its application.

Given the limited computational and financial resources of news agencies, real-life usage of fact-checking systems requires fast response times. For this reason, our submission to the FEVER-8 claim verification shared task focuses on optimizing the efficiency of such pipelines built around subtasks such as evidence retrieval and veracity prediction. We propose the Semantic Filtering for Efficient Fact Checking (SFEFC) strategy, which is inspired by the FEVER-8 baseline and designed with the goal of reducing the number of LLM calls and other computationally expensive subroutines. Furthermore, we explore the reuse of cosine similarities initially calculated within a dense retrieval step to retrieve the top 10 most relevant evidence sentence sets. We use these sets for semantic filtering methods based on similarity scores and create filters for particularly hard classification labels “Not Enough Information” and “Conflicting Evidence/Cherrypicking” by identifying thresholds for potentially relevant information and the semantic variance within these sets. Compared to the parallelized FEVER-8 baseline, which takes 33.88 seconds on average to process a claim according to the FEVER-8 shared task leaderboard, our non-parallelized system remains competitive in regard to AVeriTeC retrieval scores while reducing the runtime to 7.01 seconds, achieving the fastest average runtime per claim.

The overwhelming volume of content being published at any given moment poses a significant challenge for the design of automated fact-checking (AFC) systems on social media, requiring an emphasized consideration of efficiency aspects.As in other fields, systems built upon LLMs have achieved good results on different AFC benchmarks. However, the application of LLMs is accompanied by high resource requirements. The energy consumption of LLMs poses a significant challenge from an ecological perspective, while remaining a bottleneck in latency-sensitive scenarios like AFC within social media. Therefore, we propose a system built upon fine-tuned smaller BERT-based models. When evaluated on the ClimateCheck dataset against decoder-only LLMs, our best fine-tuned model outperforms Phi 4 and approaches Qwen3 14B in reasoning mode — while significantly reducing runtime per claim. Our findings demonstrate that small encoder-only models fine-tuned for specific tasks can still provide a substantive alternative to large decoder-only LLMs, especially in efficiency-concerned settings.

Free-text explanations are expressive and easy to understand, but many datasets lack annotated explanation data, making it challenging to train models for explainable predictions. To address this, we investigate how to use existing explanation datasets for self-rationalization and evaluate models’ out-of-distribution (OOD) performance. We fine-tune T5-Large and OLMo-7B models and assess the impact of fine-tuning data quality, the number of fine-tuning samples, and few-shot selection methods. The models are evaluated on 19 diverse OOD datasets across three tasks: natural language inference (NLI), fact-checking, and hallucination detection in abstractive summarization. For the generated explanation evaluation, we conduct a human study on 13 selected models and study its correlation with the Acceptability score (T5-11B) and three other LLM-based reference-free metrics. Human evaluation shows that the Acceptability score correlates most strongly with human judgments, demonstrating its effectiveness in evaluating free-text explanations. Our findings reveal: 1) few annotated examples effectively adapt models for OOD explanation generation; 2) compared to sample selection strategies, fine-tuning data source has a larger impact on OOD performance; and 3) models with higher label prediction accuracy tend to produce better explanations, as reflected by higher Acceptability scores.1