paper-with-me

Papers

Towards a Holistic View on Argument Quality Prediction

2022-05-19 · Michael Fromm, Max Berrendorf, Johanna Reiml, Isabelle Mayerhofer, Siddharth Bhargava, Evgeniy Faerman, Thomas Seidl

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.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2205.09803

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Tasks

Argument MiningPrediction

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Computational Argumentation Quality Assessment in Natural Language

2017-04-01 · EACL 2017 4 · Henning Wachsmuth, Nona Naderi, Yufang Hou, Yonatan Bilu 외

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

2026-04-21 · Bowen Li, Haochen Ma, Yuxin Wang, Jie Yang 외 arxiv

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

2026-03-18 · Hyun Ryu, Gyouk Chu, Gregor Betz, Eunho Yang 외 arxiv

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

2017-07-01 · ACL 2017 7 · Henning Wachsmuth, Nona Naderi, Ivan Habernal, Yufang Hou 외

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 Mining

Quantifying Holistic Review: A Multi-Modal Approach to College Admissions Prediction

2025-07-12 · Jun-Wei Zeng, Jerry Shen arxiv

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…