A Cascade Model for Proposition Extraction in Argumentation
We present a model to tackle a fundamental but understudied problem in computational argumentation: proposition extraction. Propositions are the basic units of an argument and the primary building blocks of most argument mining systems. However, they are usually substituted by argumentative discourse units obtained via surface-level text segmentation, which may yield text segments that lack semantic information necessary for subsequent argument mining processes. In contrast, our cascade model aims to extract complete propositions by handling anaphora resolution, text segmentation, reported speech, questions, imperatives, missing subjects, and revision. We formulate each task as a computational problem and test various models using a corpus of the 2016 U.S. presidential debates. We show promising performance for some tasks and discuss main challenges in proposition extraction.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Argument MiningSegmentationText SegmentationSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Extracting Implicitly Asserted Propositions in Argumentation
Argumentation accommodates various rhetorical devices, such as questions, reported speech, and imperatives. These rhetorical tools usually assert argumentatively relevant propositions rather implicitly, so understanding …
Argument MiningEncoding Argumentation Frameworks to Propositional Logic Systems
The theory of argumentation frameworks ($AF$s) has been a useful tool for artificial intelligence. The research of the connection between $AF$s and logic is an important branch. This paper generalizes the encoding method…
Robust Method of Vote Aggregation and Proposition Verification for Invariant Local Features
This paper presents a method for analysis of the vote space created from the local features extraction process in a multi-detection system. The method is opposed to the classic clustering approach and gives a high level …
Clusteringobject-detectionObject DetectionAnalysis of Dialogical Argumentation via Finite State Machines
Dialogical argumentation is an important cognitive activity by which agents exchange arguments and counterarguments as part of some process such as discussion, debate, persuasion and negotiation. Whilst numerous formal s…
Guidelines for the Annotation and Visualization of Legal Argumentation Structures in Chinese Judicial Decisions
This Guideline presents a systematic and operationalizable annotation framework for representing legal argumentation structures in judicial decisions. Grounded in theories of legal reasoning and argumentation, the framew…
Legal ReasoningArgument Mining