Consideration of multiple viewpoints on a contentious issue is critical for avoiding bias and assisting in the formulation of rational decisions. We observe that the current model imposes a constraint on diversity. This is because the conventional attention mechanism is biased toward a single semantic aspect of the claim, whereas the claim may contain multiple semantic aspects. Additionally, disregarding common-sense knowledge may result in generating perspectives that violate known facts about the world. The proposed approach is divided into two stages: the first stage considers multiple semantic aspects, which results in more diverse generated perspectives; the second stage improves the quality of generated perspectives by incorporating common-sense knowledge. We train the model on each stage using reinforcement learning and automated metric scores. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed model in generating a broader range of perspectives on a contentious subject.
Each argument begins with a conclusion, which is followed by one or more premises supporting the conclusion. The warrant is a critical component of Toulmin's argument model; it explains why the premises support the claim. Despite its critical role in establishing the claim's veracity, it is frequently omitted or left implicit, leaving readers to infer. We consider the problem of producing more diverse and high-quality warrants in response to a claim and evidence. To begin, we employ BART [1] as a conditional sequence tosequence language model to guide the output generation process. On the ARCT dataset [2], we fine-tune the BART model. Second, we propose the Multi-Agent Network for Warrant Generation as a model for producing more diverse and high-quality warrants by combining Reinforcement Learning (RL) and Generative Adversarial Networks (GAN) with the mechanism of mutual awareness of agents. In terms of warrant generation, our model generates a greater variety of warrants than other baseline models. The experimental results validate the effectiveness of our proposed hybrid model for generating warrants.
The warrant element of the Toulmin model is critical for fact-checking and assessing the strength of an argument. As implicit information, warrants justify the arguments and explain why the evidence supports the claim. Despite the critical role warrants play in facilitating argument comprehension, the fact that most works aim to select the best warrant from existing structured data and labelled data is scarce presents a fact-checking challenge, particularly when the evidence is insufficient, or the conclusion is not inferred or generated well based on the evidence. Additionally, deep learning methods for false information detection face a significant bottleneck due to their training requirement of a large amount of labelled data. Manually annotating data, on the other hand, is a time-consuming and laborious process. Thus, we examine the extent to which warrants can be retrieved or reconfigured using unstructured data obtained from their premises.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.