Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Argument Mining PDF
Preview Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Argument Mining
ACL 2016 The 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Argument Mining August 12, 2016 Berlin, Germany (cid:13)c 2016TheAssociationforComputationalLinguistics OrdercopiesofthisandotherACLproceedingsfrom: AssociationforComputationalLinguistics(ACL) 209N.EighthStreet Stroudsburg,PA18360 USA Tel: +1-570-476-8006 Fax: +1-570-476-0860 [email protected] ISBN978-1-945626-17-3 ii Preface This third edition of the Workshop on Argument Mining builds on the success of the first and second workshopsheldatACL2014andNAACL2015,withanincreasingmaturityintheworkreported. The breadthofpapersintheprogrammethisyearatteststotherangeoftechniques,thediversedomainsand thevariedgoalsthatareencompassedinargument(orargumentation)mining. The focus of argument mining is to tackle the problem of automatic identification of arguments and their internal structure and interconnections.The papers collected here provide a rich exploration of the natureofargumentativestructurethatcanbeautomaticallyidentified,fromidentificationofthepresence of argument, through evidence relationships and types of evidence relationships, argument types and premisetypes,tohighlydemandingtaskssuchasenthymemereconstruction. One of the facets that makes argument mining such an exciting and demanding problem is that purely statistical approaches very rapidly reach performance maxima with more knowledge-intensive, linguistically-awareandstructurallyconstrainedapproachesrequiredaswell. Combinationsofstatistical robustness and structural priors hold particular promise, with early results reported in several of the papershere. As a very new area, argument mining is also working ab initio on challenges such as data availability, annotation standards, corpus definition and publication, as well as quantification, validation and evaluation of results. Again, several papers here are tackling these community-oriented, practical – butvitallyimportant–problems. Wearealsoverypleasedtointroduceforthefirsttimeaspecialtrack focusingonan‘UnsharedTask’tobootstraptheprocessofshareddataprovisionforthecommunity. The contributionstothistrackwillleadtoadetailedpaneldiscussionwithagoalofestablishingsomeinitial momentumtowhatwillhopefullybecomearegularpartoftheArgumentMiningworkshopseries. This year also sees a special track on Debating Technologies reflecting the thread of work in the area thatfocusesonapplicationsofthetechniquesinsolvingrealproblemsinman-machinecommunication, driveninpartbycommercialR&DandbyIBM’sDebatingTechnologyteaminparticular. We were delighted with the quantity and quality of submissions, and as a result have developed a packed programme. The workshop attracted 31 submissions in total, of which 13 were accepted as full papers,fourasshortpapersandafurtherthreeascontributionstotheUnsharedTaskPanel. Asthearea continuestogrowwithanincreasingnumberofgroupsturningtheirattentiontotheproblemspresented byargumentmining,welookforwardtoseeingfurthergrowthintheworkshopandthecommunitythat itsupports. CAR Dundee,June2016 iii Organizers: ChrisReed,UniversityofDundee(Chair) KevinAshley,UniversityofPittsburgh ClaireCardie,CornellUniversity NancyGreen,UniversityofN.C.Greensboro IrynaGurevych,TechnischeUniversitatDarmstadt DianeLitman,UniversityofPittsburgh GeorgiosPetasis,N.C.S.R.Demokritos NoamSlonim,IBMResearch,Israel VernWalker,HofstraUniversity ProgramCommittee: StergosAfantenos,IRITToulouse CarlosAlzate,IBMResearch,Ireland KevinAshley,UniversityofPittsburgh KatarzynaBudzynska,PolishNationalAcademyofSciences ElenaCabrio,UniversityofNice ClaireCardie,CornellUniversity MatthiasGrabmair,UniversityofPittsburgh NancyGreen,UniversityofN.C.Greensboro IrynaGurevych,TechnischeUniversitatDarmstadt IvanHabernal,TechnischeUniversitatDarmstadt GraemeHirst,UniversityofToronto EdHovy,CMU VangelisKarkaletsis,N.C.S.R.Demokritos MiteshKhapra,IBMResearch,India ValiaKordoni,HumboldtUniversitatzuBerlin JonasKuhn,StuttgartUniversity JohnLawrence,UniversityofDundee JoaoLeite,FCT-UNL–UniversidadeNovadeLisboa RanLevy,IBMResearch,Israel BeishuiLiao,ZhejiangUniversity MariaLiakata,UniversityofWarwick DianeLitman,UniversityofPittsburgh BernardoMagnini,FBKTrento RobertMercer,UniversityofWesternOntario Marie-FrancineMoens,KatholiekeUniversiteitLeuven HuyNguyen,UniversityofPittsburgh SmarandaMuresan,ColumbiaUniversity FabioPaglieri,CNRItaly AlexisPalmer,SaarlandUniversity JoonsukPark,CornellUniversity SimonParsons,KingsCollegeLondon GeorgiosPetasis,N.C.S.R.Demokritos CraigPfeifer,MITRE ChrisReed,UniversityofDundee ArielRosenfeld,Bar-IlanUniversity v PatrickSaint-Dizier,IRITToulouse ChristianSchunn,UniversityPittsburgh JodiSchneider,UniversityPittsburgh NoamSlonim,IBMResearch,Israel ChristianStab,TechnischeUniversitatDarmstadt ManfredStede,UniversitatPotsdam BennoStein,UniversitatWeimar HenningWachsmuth,UniversitatWeimar MarilynWalker,UniversityofCalifornia,SantaCruz VernWalker,HofstraUniversity SerenaVillata,INRIASophia-AntipolisMediterranee LuWang,NortheasternUniversity AdamWyner,UniversityAberdeen vi Table of Contents “WhatIsYourEvidence?”AStudyofControversialTopicsonSocialMedia AseelAddawoodandMasoodaBashir.....................................................1 SummarizingMulti-PartyArgumentativeConversationsinReaderCommentonNews EmmaBarkerandRobertGaizauskas.....................................................12 Argumentativetextsandclausetypes MariaBecker,AlexisPalmerandAnetteFrank ............................................ 21 Contextualstanceclassificationofopinions: Asteptowardsenthymemereconstructioninonlinereviews PavithraRajendran,DanushkaBollegalaandSimonParsons................................31 TheCASSTechniqueforEvaluatingthePerformanceofArgumentMining RoryDuthie,JohnLawrence,KatarzynaBudzynskaandChrisReed.........................40 ExtractingCaseLawSentencesforArgumentationabouttheMeaningofStatutoryTerms JaromirSavelkaandKevinD.Ashley.....................................................50 ScrutableFeatureSetsforStanceClassification AngroshMandya,AdvaithSiddharthanandAdamWyner...................................60 Argumentation: Content,Structure,andRelationshipwithEssayQuality BeataBeigmanKlebanov,ChristianStab,JillBurstein,YiSong,BinodGyawali andIrynaGurevych.....................................................................70 NeuralAttentionModelforClassificationofSentencesthatSupportPromoting/SuppressingRelationship YutaKoreeda,ToshihikoYanase,KohsukeYanai,MisaSatoandYoshikiNiwa ............... 76 TowardsFeasibleGuidelinesfortheAnnotationofArgumentSchemes ElenaMusi,DebanjanGhoshandSmarandaMuresan......................................82 IdentifyingArgumentComponentsthroughTextRank GeorgiosPetasisandVangelisKarkaletsis.................................................94 Rhetoricalstructureandargumentationstructureinmonologuetext AndreasPeldszusandManfredStede....................................................103 RecognizingtheAbsenceofOpposingArgumentsinPersuasiveEssays ChristianStabandIrynaGurevych......................................................113 ExpertStanceGraphsforComputationalArgumentation OrithToledo-Ronen,RoyBar-HaimandNoamSlonim....................................119 FilltheGap! AnalyzingImplicitPremisesbetweenClaimsfromOnlineDebates FilipBoltuzicandJanŠnajder .......................................................... 124 Summarisingthepointsmadeinonlinepoliticaldebates CharlieEgan,AdvaithSiddharthanandAdamWyner ..................................... 134 WhattoDowithanAirport? MiningArgumentsintheGermanOnlineParticipationProjectTempelhoferFeld MatthiasLiebeck,KatharinaEsauandStefanConrad ..................................... 144 vii Unsharedtask: (Dis)agreementinonlinedebates MariaSkeppstedt,MagnusSahlgren,CaritaParadisandAndreasKerren....................154 UnsharedTask: PerspectiveBasedLocalAgreementandDisagreementinOnlineDebate Chantal van Son, Tommaso Caselli, Antske Fokkens, Isa Maks, Roser Morante, Lora Aroyo and PiekVossen................................................................................160 UnsharedTask: APreliminaryStudyofDisputationBehaviorinOnlineDebatingForum ZhongyuWei,YandiXia,ChenLi,YangLiu,ZacharyStallbohm,YiLiandYangJin ........ 166 viii Workshop Program Friday,August12,2016 09:00–09:10 Welcome 09:10–10:30 SessionI 09:10–09:30 “WhatIsYourEvidence?”AStudyofControversialTopicsonSocialMedia AseelAddawoodandMasoodaBashir 09:30–09:50 Summarizing Multi-Party Argumentative Conversations in Reader Comment on News EmmaBarkerandRobertGaizauskas 09:50–10:10 Argumentativetextsandclausetypes MariaBecker,AlexisPalmerandAnetteFrank 10:10–10:30 Contextualstanceclassificationofopinions: Asteptowardsenthymemereconstruc- tioninonlinereviews PavithraRajendran,DanushkaBollegalaandSimonParsons 10:30–11:00 Coffeebreak 11:00–12:30 SessionII 11:00–11:20 TheCASSTechniqueforEvaluatingthePerformanceofArgumentMining RoryDuthie,JohnLawrence,KatarzynaBudzynskaandChrisReed 11:20–11:40 Extracting Case Law Sentences for Argumentation about the Meaning of Statutory Terms JaromirSavelkaandKevinD.Ashley 11:40–12:00 ScrutableFeatureSetsforStanceClassification AngroshMandya,AdvaithSiddharthanandAdamWyner 12:00–12:15 Argumentation: Content,Structure,andRelationshipwithEssayQuality Beata Beigman Klebanov, Christian Stab, Jill Burstein, Yi Song, Binod Gyawali andIrynaGurevych 12:15–12:30 Neural Attention Model for Classification of Sentences that Support Promot- ing/SuppressingRelationship YutaKoreeda,ToshihikoYanase,KohsukeYanai,MisaSatoandYoshikiNiwa ix Friday,August12,2016(continued) 12:30–14:00 Lunch 14:00–15:30 SessionIII 14:00–14:20 TowardsFeasibleGuidelinesfortheAnnotationofArgumentSchemes ElenaMusi,DebanjanGhoshandSmarandaMuresan 14:20–14:40 IdentifyingArgumentComponentsthroughTextRank GeorgiosPetasisandVangelisKarkaletsis 14:40–15:00 Rhetoricalstructureandargumentationstructureinmonologuetext AndreasPeldszusandManfredStede 15:00–15:15 RecognizingtheAbsenceofOpposingArgumentsinPersuasiveEssays ChristianStabandIrynaGurevych 15:15–15:30 ExpertStanceGraphsforComputationalArgumentation OrithToledo-Ronen,RoyBar-HaimandNoamSlonim 15:30–16:00 Coffeebreak x
Description:The list of books you might like
