Agreement and Disagreement: Comparison of Points of View in the Political Domain
The automated comparison of points of view between two politicians is a very challenging task, due not only to the lack of annotated resources, but also to the different dimensions participating to the definition of agreement and disagreement. In order to shed light on this complex task, we first carry out a pilot study to manually annotate the components involved in detecting agreement and disagreement. Then, based on these findings, we implement different features to capture them automatically via supervised classification. We do not focus on debates in dialogical form, but we rather consider sets of documents, in which politicians may express their position with respect to different topics in an implicit or explicit way, like during an electoral campaign. We create and make available three different datasets.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
PositionSentiment AnalysisSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Rater Cohesion and Quality from a Vicarious Perspective
Human feedback is essential for building human-centered AI systems across domains where disagreement is prevalent, such as AI safety, content moderation, or sentiment analysis. Many disagreements, particularly in politic…
Sentiment AnalysisTopic-Based Agreement and Disagreement in US Electoral Manifestos
We present a topic-based analysis of agreement and disagreement in political manifestos, which relies on a new method for topic detection based on key concept clustering. Our approach outperforms both standard techniques…
ClusteringInterrater Disagreement Resolution: A Systematic Procedure to Reach Consensus in Annotation Tasks
We present a systematic procedure for interrater disagreement resolution. The procedure is general, but of particular use in multiple-annotator tasks geared towards ground truth construction. We motivate our proposal by …
When Reviewers Lock Horn: Finding Disagreement in Scientific Peer Reviews
To this date, the efficacy of the scientific publishing enterprise fundamentally rests on the strength of the peer review process. The journal editor or the conference chair primarily relies on the expert reviewers' asse…
A Collaborative Content Moderation Framework for Toxicity Detection based on Conformalized Estimates of Annotation Disagreement
Content moderation typically combines the efforts of human moderators and machine learning models. However, these systems often rely on data where significant disagreement occurs during moderation, reflecting the subject…
Conformal Prediction