Sentiment-Stance-Specificity (SSS) Dataset: Identifying Support-based Entailment among Opinions. (L18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argument mining is a method for extracting argument components and structures from natural language texts. |
| Approach: | They propose to model arguments as a set of premises that either support each other or collectively support a conclusion. |
| Outcome: | The proposed rules give an overall accuracy of 0.83 for the three datasets. |
Similar Papers
Is Something Better than Nothing? Automatically Predicting Stance-based Arguments Using Deep Learning and Small Labelled Dataset (N18-2)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argument mining is a subset of NLP that deals with extracting arguments from user-based content. |
| Approach: | They propose to use weakly supervised and semi-supervised methods to automatically annotate reviews and provide large annotated datasets. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods can be used to learn better models for implicit/explicit opinion classification. |
-Stance: A Large-Scale Real World Dataset of Stances in Legal Argumentation (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Current tools for legal argument reasoning do not support this task. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a large-scale dataset to facilitate work on the legal argument stance classification task by evaluating whether a case summary strengthens or weakens a legal argument. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset is used to facilitate work on the legal argument stance classification task, which involves assessing whether a case summary strengthens or weakens a legal argument (polarity) and to what extent (intensity). |
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. |
Determining Relative Argument Specificity and Stance for Complex Argumentative Structures (P19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work on claim specificity and stance has been limited to shallow arguments . a system that can determine the stance of claims employed in argumentation is not sufficient . |
| Approach: | They propose to use a dataset of manually curated argument trees to study claim specificity and stance in argumentation. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset consists of manually curated argument trees for 741 controversial topics covering 95,312 unique claims. |
STANDER: An Expert-Annotated Dataset for News Stance Detection and Evidence Retrieval (2020.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
Costanza Conforti, Jakob Berndt, Mohammad Taher Pilehvar, Chryssi Giannitsarou, Flavio Toxvaerd, Nigel Collier
| Challenge: | a new news dataset targets both stance detection (SD) and fine-grained evidence retrieval (ER) . stance Detection (SD), which is a form of multitask learning, has gained increasing interest in recent work . |
| Approach: | They propose a news dataset that targets both stance detection (SD) and fine-grained evidence retrieval (ER) their dataset is an expert-annotated news dataset with 3,291 articles. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset is a high-quality benchmark for future research in stance detection and evidence retrieval. |
Constructing A Dataset of Support and Attack Relations in Legal Arguments in Court Judgements using Linguistic Rules (2022.lrec-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Argumentation mining is a growing area of research with several interesting practical applications. |
| Approach: | They propose three sets of rules based on linguistic knowledge and distant supervision to identify such relations from Indian Supreme Court judgments. |
| Outcome: | The proposed rules are based on linguistic knowledge and distant supervision and use the source of the argument to build a dataset of Support and Attack relations between sentences in a court judgement with reasonable accuracy. |
Can We Identify Stance without Target Arguments? A Study for Rumour Stance Classification (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing target-aware models underperform in cases where the context of the target is crucial. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to enhance reasoning with the targets and propose 'target-aware' models without awareness of the target. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework achieves state-of-the-art on two benchmark datasets. |
STANCY: Stance Classification Based on Consistency Cues (D19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent work has shown that stance classification is a critical step for information credibility and automated fact-checking. |
| Approach: | They propose a neural network model for stance classification leveraging BERT representations and augmenting them with a novel consistency constraint. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms existing methods on a Perspectrum dataset and shows that it is more accurate than existing methods. |
Modelling Argumentation for an User Opinion Aggregation Tool (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for eliciting information from user opinion data are limited to high-level text and are prone to hallucination, degrading system performance or introduce biases. |
| Approach: | They propose an argumentation annotation scheme that models argumentative structure across user opinion domains. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can predict arguments and contextual details from user opinions . the model can rank products based on user opinions and improve user experience . |
Argumentation and Domain Discourse in Scholarly Articles on the Theory of International Relations (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
Magdalena Wolska, Sassan Gholiagha, Mitja Sienknecht, Dora Kiesel, Irene Lopez Garcia, Patrick Riehmann, Matti Wiegmann, Bernd Froehlich, Katrin Girgensohn, Jürgen Neyer, Benno Stein
| Challenge: | SKILL project aims to provide students with AI tools to facilitate analysis of argumentation in scholarly articles on international relations. |
| Approach: | They propose to use AI to analyze argumentation in scholarly articles on international relations . they use a dataset, discourse analysis, and baseline experiments to examine argumentation and domain content types . |
| Outcome: | The proposed method enables educationally-relevant insight into scholarly IR discourse . it requires domain-specific training and fine-tuning on relation and content type prediction tasks. |