Argumentation Quality Assessment: Theory vs. Practice
Argumentation quality is viewed differently in argumentation theory and in practical assessment approaches. This paper studies to what extent the views match empirically. We find that most observations on quality phrased spontaneously are in fact adequately represented by theory. Even more, relative comparisons of arguments in practice correlate with absolute quality ratings based on theory. Our results clarify how the two views can learn from each other.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Argument MiningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Improving Quality Assessment of Online Reviews UsingFormal Argumentation Theory and Knowledge Graphs
In this extended abstract, we introduce a previously developed framework for the assessment of the quality of product reviews by using formal argumentation theory and machine learning. Then, we outline current developme…
BIG-bench Machine LearningKnowledge GraphsCreating a Domain-diverse Corpus for Theory-based Argument Quality Assessment
Computational models of argument quality (AQ) have focused primarily on assessing the overall quality or just one specific characteristic of an argument, such as its convincingness or its clarity. However, previous work …
Computational Argumentation Quality Assessment in Natural Language
Research on computational argumentation faces the problem of how to automatically assess the quality of an argument or argumentation. While different quality dimensions have been approached in natural language processing…
Rhetoric, Logic, and Dialectic: Advancing Theory-based Argument Quality Assessment in Natural Language Processing
Though preceding work in computational argument quality (AQ) mostly focuses on assessing overall AQ, researchers agree that writers would benefit from feedback targeting individual dimensions of argumentation theory. How…
ArguAgent: AI-Supported Real-Time Grouping for Productive Argumentation in STEM Classrooms
Argumentation is a core practice in STEM education, but its productivity depends on who participates and how they interact. Higher-achieving students often dominate the talk and decision-making, while lower-achieving pee…
Prompt Engineering