Classifying Argumentative Relations Using Logical Mechanisms and Argumentation Schemes
While argument mining has achieved significant success in classifying argumentative relations between statements (support, attack, and neutral), we have a limited computational understanding of logical mechanisms that constitute those relations. Most recent studies rely on black-box models, which are not as linguistically insightful as desired. On the other hand, earlier studies use rather simple lexical features, missing logical relations between statements. To overcome these limitations, our work classifies argumentative relations based on four logical and theory-informed mechanisms between two statements, namely (i) factual consistency, (ii) sentiment coherence, (iii) causal relation, and (iv) normative relation. We demonstrate that our operationalization of these logical mechanisms classifies argumentative relations without directly training on data labeled with the relations, significantly better than several unsupervised baselines. We further demonstrate that these mechanisms also improve supervised classifiers through representation learning.
Code (1)
Tasks
Argument MiningRelationRepresentation LearningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Traditional Machine Learning and Deep Learning Models for Argumentation Mining in Russian Texts
Argumentation mining is a field of computational linguistics that is devoted to extracting from texts and classifying arguments and relations between them, as well as constructing an argumentative structure. A significan…
BIG-bench Machine LearningMachine TranslationTranslationGuidelines 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 MiningAn Argument-Annotated Corpus of Scientific Publications
Argumentation is an essential feature of scientific language. We present an annotation study resulting in a corpus of scientific publications annotated with argumentative components and relations. The argumentative annot…
Argument MiningDetecting Argumentative Discourse Acts with Linguistic Alignment
We report the results of preliminary investigations into the relationship between linguistic alignment and dialogical argumentation at the level of discourse acts. We annotated a proof of concept dataset with illocutions…
Towards assessing depth of argumentation
For analyzing argumentative text, we propose to study the {`}depth{'} of argumentation as one important component, which we distinguish from argument quality. In a pilot study with German newspaper commentary texts, we a…