Topic Ontologies for Arguments
원문 초록
Many computational argumentation tasks, like stance classification, are topic-dependent: the effectiveness of approaches to these tasks significantly depends on whether the approaches were trained on arguments from the same topics as those they are tested on. So, which are these topics that researchers train approaches on? This paper contributes the first comprehensive survey of topic coverage, assessing 45 argument corpora. For the assessment, we take the first step towards building an argument topic ontology, consulting three diverse authoritative sources: the World Economic Forum, the Wikipedia list of controversial topics, and Debatepedia. Comparing the topic sets between the authoritative sources and corpora, our analysis shows that the corpora topics-which are mostly those frequently discussed in public online fora - are covered well by the sources. However, other topics from the sources are less extensively covered by the corpora of today, revealing interesting future directions for corpus construction.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Detecting Statements in Text: A Domain-Agnostic Few-Shot Solution
WIBA: What Is Being Argued? A Comprehensive Approach to Argument Mining
Rumour Evaluation with Very Large Language Models
TILFA: A Unified Framework for Text, Image, and Layout Fusion in Argument Mining
Prompting and Fine-Tuning Open-Sourced Large Language Models for Stance Classification
AQE: Argument Quadruplet Extraction via a Quad-Tagging Augmented Generative Approach
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.