High-quality arguments are an essential part of decision-making. Automatically predicting the quality of an argument is a complex task that recently got much attention in argument mining. However, the annotation effort for this task is exceptionally
high. Therefore, we test uncertainty-based active learning (AL) methods on two popular argument-strength data sets to estimate whether sample-efficient learning can be enabled. Our extensive empirical evaluation shows that uncertainty-based acquisition functions can not surpass the accuracy reached with the random acquisition on these data sets.
Implicit event argument extraction (EAE) is a crucial document-level information extraction task that aims to identify event arguments beyond the sentence level. Despite many efforts for this task, the lack of enough training data has long impeded th
e study. In this paper, we take a new perspective to address the data sparsity issue faced by implicit EAE, by bridging the task with machine reading comprehension (MRC). Particularly, we devise two data augmentation regimes via MRC, including: 1) implicit knowledge transfer, which enables knowledge transfer from other tasks, by building a unified training framework in the MRC formulation, and 2) explicit data augmentation, which can explicitly generate new training examples, by treating MRC models as an annotator. The extensive experiments have justified the effectiveness of our approach --- it not only obtains state-of-the-art performance on two benchmarks, but also demonstrates superior results in a data-low scenario.
Argument pair extraction (APE) aims to extract interactive argument pairs from two passages of a discussion. Previous work studied this task in the context of peer review and rebuttal, and decomposed it into a sequence labeling task and a sentence re
lation classification task. However, despite the promising performance, such an approach obtains the argument pairs implicitly by the two decomposed tasks, lacking explicitly modeling of the argument-level interactions between argument pairs. In this paper, we tackle the APE task by a mutual guidance framework, which could utilize the information of an argument in one passage to guide the identification of arguments that can form pairs with it in another passage. In this manner, two passages can mutually guide each other in the process of APE. Furthermore, we propose an inter-sentence relation graph to effectively model the inter-relations between two sentences and thus facilitates the extraction of argument pairs. Our proposed method can better represent the holistic argument-level semantics and thus explicitly capture the complex correlations between argument pairs. Experimental results show that our approach significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art model.
This study evaluates whether model-based Collaborative Filtering (CF) algorithms, which have been extensively studied and widely used to build recommender systems, can be used to predict which common nouns a predicate can take as its complement. We f
ind that, when trained on verb-noun co-occurrence data drawn from the Corpus of Contemporary American-English (COCA), two popular model-based CF algorithms, Singular Value Decomposition and Non-negative Matrix Factorization, perform well on this task, each achieving an AUROC of at least 0.89 and surpassing several different baselines. We then show that the embedding-vectors for verbs and nouns learned by the two CF models can be quantized (via application of k-means clustering) with minimal loss of performance on the prediction task while only using a small number of verb and noun clusters (relative to the number of distinct verbs and nouns). Finally we evaluate the alignment between the quantized embedding vectors for verbs and the Levin verb classes, finding that the alignment surpassed several randomized baselines. We conclude by discussing how model-based CF algorithms might be applied to learning restrictions on constituent selection between various lexical categories and how these (learned) models could then be used to augment a (rule-based) constituency grammar.
Recent work in cross-topic argument mining attempts to learn models that generalise across topics rather than merely relying on within-topic spurious correlations. We examine the effectiveness of this approach by analysing the output of single-task a
nd multi-task models for cross-topic argument mining, through a combination of linear approximations of their decision boundaries, manual feature grouping, challenge examples, and ablations across the input vocabulary. Surprisingly, we show that cross-topic models still rely mostly on spurious correlations and only generalise within closely related topics, e.g., a model trained only on closed-class words and a few common open-class words outperforms a state-of-the-art cross-topic model on distant target topics.
Accurate recovery of predicate-argument structure from a Universal Dependency (UD) parse is central to downstream tasks such as extraction of semantic roles or event representations. This study introduces compchains, a categorization of the hierarchy
of predicate dependency relations present within a UD parse. Accuracy of compchain classification serves as a proxy for measuring accurate recovery of predicate-argument structure from sentences with embedding. We analyzed the distribution of compchains in three UD English treebanks, EWT, GUM and LinES, revealing that these treebanks are sparse with respect to sentences with predicate-argument structure that includes predicate-argument embedding. We evaluated the CoNLL 2018 Shared Task UDPipe (v1.2) baseline (dependency parsing) models as compchain classifiers for the EWT, GUMS and LinES UD treebanks. Our results indicate that these three baseline models exhibit poorer performance on sentences with predicate-argument structure with more than one level of embedding; we used compchains to characterize the errors made by these parsers and present examples of erroneous parses produced by the parser that were identified using compchains. We also analyzed the distribution of compchains in 58 non-English UD treebanks and then used compchains to evaluate the CoNLL'18 Shared Task baseline model for each of these treebanks. Our analysis shows that performance with respect to compchain classification is only weakly correlated with the official evaluation metrics (LAS, MLAS and BLEX). We identify gaps in the distribution of compchains in several of the UD treebanks, thus providing a roadmap for how these treebanks may be supplemented. We conclude by discussing how compchains provide a new perspective on the sparsity of training data for UD parsers, as well as the accuracy of the resulting UD parses.
We rely on arguments in our daily lives to deliver our opinions and base them on evidence, making them more convincing in turn. However, finding and formulating arguments can be challenging. In this work, we present the Arg-CTRL - a language model fo
r argument generation that can be controlled to generate sentence-level arguments for a given topic, stance, and aspect. We define argument aspect detection as a necessary method to allow this fine-granular control and crowdsource a dataset with 5,032 arguments annotated with aspects. Our evaluation shows that the Arg-CTRL is able to generate high-quality, aspect-specific arguments, applicable to automatic counter-argument generation. We publish the model weights and all datasets and code to train the Arg-CTRL.
In this paper, we focus on identifying interactive argument pairs from two posts with opposite stances to a certain topic. Considering opinions are exchanged from different perspectives of the discussing topic, we study the discrete representations f
or arguments to capture varying aspects in argumentation languages (e.g., the debate focus and the participant behavior). Moreover, we utilize hierarchical structure to model post-wise information incorporating contextual knowledge. Experimental results on the large-scale dataset collected from CMV show that our proposed framework can significantly outperform the competitive baselines. Further analyses reveal why our model yields superior performance and prove the usefulness of our learned representations.
We study the problem of Cross-lingual Event Argument Extraction (CEAE). The task aims to predict argument roles of entity mentions for events in text, whose language is different from the language that a predictive model has been trained on. Previous
work on CEAE has shown the cross-lingual benefits of universal dependency trees in capturing shared syntactic structures of sentences across languages. In particular, this work exploits the existence of the syntactic connections between the words in the dependency trees as the anchor knowledge to transfer the representation learning across languages for CEAE models (i.e., via graph convolutional neural networks -- GCNs). In this paper, we introduce two novel sources of language-independent information for CEAE models based on the semantic similarity and the universal dependency relations of the word pairs in different languages. We propose to use the two sources of information to produce shared sentence structures to bridge the gap between languages and improve the cross-lingual performance of the CEAE models. Extensive experiments are conducted with Arabic, Chinese, and English to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method for CEAE.
The purpuse of the speech whatever its type is the inflence so the speaker tries so hard to
produse linguistic words that direct the reciever towards a specific action.The importance
of the argumintation theory lies in the depending on the speech t
echniques which the
sender use in the speech .And which make his speech acceptable to the reciever.The
argumentation theory started in the fields of Linguistics ,Logic ,Anthropology…etc and
different other sciences.It becomes a complete theory after Perlman's researches which the
scientists work on.All the analytists and researchers get benefit from in the communication
and connecting theory.Relying on the speaker's techniques in achieving a successful
connecting that leags to a real communication is the purpose of argumenation theory which
is a still growing.And which considers the speech act theory as a scientific background.
