Towards a Holistic View on Argument Quality Prediction
Argumentation is one of society's foundational pillars, and, sparked by advances in NLP and the vast availability of text data, automated mining of arguments receives increasing attention. A decisive property of arguments is their strength or quality. While there are works on the automated estimation of argument strength, their scope is narrow: they focus on isolated datasets and neglect the interactions with related argument mining tasks, such as argument identification, evidence detection, or emotional appeal. In this work, we close this gap by approaching argument quality estimation from multiple different angles: Grounded on rich results from thorough empirical evaluations, we assess the generalization capabilities of argument quality estimation across diverse domains, the interplay with related argument mining tasks, and the impact of emotions on perceived argument strength. We find that generalization depends on a sufficient representation of different domains in the training part. In zero-shot transfer and multi-task experiments, we reveal that argument quality is among the more challenging tasks but can improve others. Finally, we show that emotions play a minor role in argument quality than is often assumed.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Argument MiningPredictionSimilar 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…
Beyond Rating: A Comprehensive Evaluation and Benchmark for AI Reviews
The rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) has spurred interest in automated peer review; however, progress is currently stifled by benchmarks that treat reviewing primarily as a rating prediction task. We argue …
Argument Reconstruction as Supervision for Critical Thinking in LLMs
To think critically about arguments, human learners are trained to identify, reconstruct, and evaluate arguments. Argument reconstruction is especially important because it makes an argument's underlying inferences expli…
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…
Argument MiningQuantifying Holistic Review: A Multi-Modal Approach to College Admissions Prediction
This paper introduces the Comprehensive Applicant Profile Score (CAPS), a novel multi-modal framework designed to quantitatively model and interpret holistic college admissions evaluations. CAPS decomposes applicant prof…