Improving Neural Argumentative Stance Classification in Controversial Topics with Emotion-Lexicon Features
Argumentation mining comprises several subtasks, among which stance classification focuses on identifying the standpoint expressed in an argumentative text toward a specific target topic. While arguments-especially about controversial topics-often appeal to emotions, most prior work has not systematically incorporated explicit, fine-grained emotion analysis to improve performance on this task. In particular, prior research on stance classification has predominantly utilized non-argumentative texts and has been restricted to specific domains or topics, limiting generalizability. We work on five datasets from diverse domains encompassing a range of controversial topics and present an approach for expanding the Bias-Corrected NRC Emotion Lexicon using DistilBERT embeddings, which we feed into a Neural Argumentative Stance Classification model. Our method systematically expands the emotion lexicon through contextualized embeddings to identify emotionally charged terms not previously captured in the lexicon. Our expanded NRC lexicon (eNRC) improves over the baseline across all five datasets (up to +6.2 percentage points in F1 score), outperforms the original NRC on four datasets (up to +3.0), and surpasses the LLM-based approach on nearly all corpora. We provide all resources-including eNRC, the adapted corpora, and model architecture-to enable other researchers to build upon our work.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Belief-based Generation of Argumentative Claims
When engaging in argumentative discourse, skilled human debaters tailor claims to the beliefs of the audience, to construct effective arguments. Recently, the field of computational argumentation witnessed extensive effo…
InformativenessText GenerationDave the debater: a retrieval-based and generative argumentative dialogue agent
In this paper, we explore the problem of developing an argumentative dialogue agent that can be able to discuss with human users on controversial topics. We describe two systems that use retrieval-based and generative mo…
Argument MiningRetrievalStance DetectionDetermining Relative Argument Specificity and Stance for Complex Argumentative Structures
Systems for automatic argument generation and debate require the ability to (1) determine the stance of any claims employed in the argument and (2) assess the specificity of each claim relative to the argument context. E…
SpecificityOpening up Minds with Argumentative Dialogues
Recent research on argumentative dialogues has focused on persuading people to take some action, changing their stance on the topic of discussion, or winning debates. In this work, we focus on argumentative dialogues tha…
A Benchmark for Cross-Domain Argumentative Stance Classification on Social Media
Argumentative stance classification plays a key role in identifying authors' viewpoints on specific topics. However, generating diverse pairs of argumentative sentences across various domains is challenging. Existing ben…
Stance Classification