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. However, a large-scale theory-based corpus and corresponding computational models are missing. We fill this gap by conducting an extensive analysis covering three diverse domains of online argumentative writing and presenting GAQCorpus: the first large-scale English multi-domain (community Q&A forums, debate forums, review forums) corpus annotated with theory-based AQ scores. We then propose the first computational approaches to theory-based assessment, which can serve as strong baselines for future work. We demonstrate the feasibility of large-scale AQ annotation, show that exploiting relations between dimensions yields performance improvements, and explore the synergies between theory-based prediction and practical AQ assessment.
Code (1)
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
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…
Efficient Pairwise Annotation of Argument Quality
We present an efficient annotation framework for argument quality, a feature difficult to be measured reliably as per previous work. A stochastic transitivity model is combined with an effective sampling strategy to infe…
Towards a Perspectivist Turn in Argument Quality Assessment
The assessment of argument quality depends on well-established logical, rhetorical, and dialectical properties that are unavoidably subjective: multiple valid assessments may exist, there is no unequivocal ground truth. …
validEnd-to-End Argument Mining over Varying Rhetorical Structures
Rhetorical Structure Theory implies no single discourse interpretation of a text, and the limitations of RST parsers further exacerbate inconsistent parsing of similar structures. Therefore, it is important to take into …
Argument MiningDependency ParsingOn the Relative Expressiveness of Argumentation Frameworks, Normal Logic Programs and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks
We analyse the expressiveness of the two-valued semantics of abstract argumentation frameworks, normal logic programs and abstract dialectical frameworks. By expressiveness we mean the ability to encode a desired set of …
Abstract Argumentation