Which Argumentative Aspects of Hate Speech in Social Media can be reliably identified?
원문 초록
With the increasing diversity of use cases of large language models, a more informative treatment of texts seems necessary. An argumentative analysis could foster a more reasoned usage of chatbots, text completion mechanisms or other applications. However, it is unclear which aspects of argumentation can be reliably identified and integrated in language models. In this paper, we present an empirical assessment of the reliability with which different argumentative aspects can be automatically identified in hate speech in social media. We have enriched the Hateval corpus (Basile et al. 2019) with a manual annotation of some argumentative components, adapted from Wagemans (2016)'s Periodic Table of Arguments. We show that some components can be identified with reasonable reliability. For those that present a high error ratio, we analyze the patterns of disagreement between expert annotators and errors in automatic procedures, and we propose adaptations of those categories that can be more reliably reproduced.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Step-wise Policy for Rare-tool Knowledge (SPaRK): Offline RL that Drives Diverse Tool Use in LLMs
Exploring Design of Multi-Agent LLM Dialogues for Research Ideation
MS-DPPs: Multi-Source Determinantal Point Processes for Contextual Diversity Refinement of Composite Attributes in Text to Image Retrieval
Prompt-Free Conditional Diffusion for Multi-object Image Augmentation
Is Diversity All You Need for Scalable Robotic Manipulation?
Lost in Latent Space: An Empirical Study of Latent Diffusion Models for Physics Emulation
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.