Beyond Recognising Entailment: Formalising Natural Language Inference from an Argumentative Perspective (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for recognizing textual entailment lack a standardized definition of inference, making it difficult to compare methods trained on different datasets. |
| Approach: | They propose a rigorous approach to align entailment recognition with argumentation theory by using a tool to assist humans in annotating arguments according to the PTA. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model is based on a human-trained dataset and provides insights into non-expert annotator training. |
Similar Papers
Can Large Language Models Understand Argument Schemes? (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argument schemes are stereotypical forms of reasoning that occur in everyday arguments. |
| Approach: | They propose to use large language models (LLMs) to classify argument schemes based on Walton’s taxonomy to employ formal definitions and LLM-generated descriptions to enhance task instructions. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models perform well on annotated and automatically generated arguments, and provide insights for advancing reasoning capabilities in computational argumentation. |
Mining Complex Patterns of Argumentative Reasoning in Natural Language Dialogue (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argumentation scheme mining is the task of automatically identifying reasoning mechanisms behind argument inferences. |
| Approach: | They propose to create a corpus of 441 arguments annotated with 24 argumentation schemes and leverage the capabilities of LLMs and Transformer-based models to validate their applicability in real-world scenarios. |
| Outcome: | The proposed corpus of arguments is pre-trained on a large corpus containing textbook-like argumentation schemes and validates their applicability in real-world scenarios. |
Machine-Aided Annotation for Fine-Grained Proposition Types in Argumentation (2020.lrec-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a corpus of 2016 debates and commentary contains 4,648 argumentative propositions annotated with fine-grained proposition types. |
| Approach: | They propose a machine learning-human workflow for annotating for four complex proposition types . they demonstrate with preliminary analysis of rhetorical strategies and structure in presidential debates . |
| Outcome: | The proposed method can be used by technical researchers seeking more nuanced representations of argument . it can also be used to analyze rhetorical strategies and structure in presidential debates . |
A Multi-layer Annotated Corpus of Argumentative Text: From Argument Schemes to Discourse Relations (L18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent interest in Argumentation Mining has brought to the fore the need for corpora annotated with argument information, which can be used as training data. |
| Approach: | They propose a set of guidelines for the annotation of argument schemes and a new annotation tool for the 'inferential' argument schemes. |
| Outcome: | The proposed corpus includes 112 argumentative microtexts and a new annotation tool. |
Exploring the Potential of Large Language Models in Computational Argumentation (2024.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argumentation is an essential tool in various domains, including law, public policy, and artificial intelligence. |
| Approach: | They propose to evaluate LLMs on various computational argumentation tasks . they organize existing tasks into six main categories and standardize the format of 14 datasets . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model performs well on argument mining and argument generation tasks. |
PropSegmEnt: A Large-Scale Corpus for Proposition-Level Segmentation and Entailment Recognition (2023.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing systems for Natural Language Inference (NLI) only recognize textual entailment relations on sentence-level . however, even a simple sentence often contains multiple propositions, i.e. distinct units of meaning conveyed by the sentence . |
| Approach: | They propose a system to recognize whether one text is textually entailed by another . they use a corpus of over 45K propositions annotated by human raters to study the textual entailment relation of each proposition in a sentence individually. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset can be used to understand the compositionality of NLI labels. |
Natural Language Reasoning in Large Language Models: Analysis and Evaluation (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argumentative reasoning presents unique challenges due to its reliance on context, implicit assumptions, and value judgments. |
| Approach: | They propose a large-scale evaluation of LLMs' unconstrained natural language reasoning capabilities . they formalise a new strategy designed to evaluate argumentative reasoning in LLM . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model performs better on a range of reasoning tasks than other models. |
Entailed Between the Lines: Incorporating Implication into NLI (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Shreya Havaldar, Hamidreza Alvari, John Palowitch, Mohammad Javad Hosseini, Senaka Buthpitiya, Alex Fabrikant
| Challenge: | True Emotions, social cues, insults, and a myriad of other messages are conveyed implicitly, often even more so than explicitly. |
| Approach: | They propose a dataset to help LLMs understand implied entailment . |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset enables LLMs to understand implied entailment and can generalize this understanding across datasets and domains. |
Which Side Are You On? A Multi-task Dataset for End-to-End Argument Summarisation and Evaluation (2024.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Hao Li, Yuping Wu, Viktor Schlegel, Riza Batista-Navarro, Tharindu Madusanka, Iqra Zahid, Jiayan Zeng, Xiaochi Wang, Xinran He, Yizhi Li, Goran Nenadic
| Challenge: | Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have made it difficult to build an automated debate system that helps people to synthesise persuasive arguments. |
| Approach: | They propose to use an argument mining dataset to capture the end-to-end process of preparing an argumentative essay for a debate. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset shows that it performs better on individual tasks than on human-centred evaluations. |
Implicit Knowledge in Argumentative Texts: An Annotated Corpus (2020.lrec-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Especially in argumentative texts, people omit information that seems clear and evident . a computational system typically does not possess commonsense or domain-specific knowledge to reconstruct implied information. |
| Approach: | They build a corpus of human annotations of missing and implied information in argumentative texts. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset can help to assist automated argument analysis and guide the process of revealing implicit information in argumentative texts automatically. |