The ReCAP Corpus: A Corpus of Complex Argument Graphs on German Education Politics

Dumani, Lorik; Biertz, Manuel; Witry, Alex; Ludwig, Anna-Katharina; Lenz, Mirko; Ollinger, Stefan; Bergmann, Ralph; Schenkel, Ralf

doi:10.1109/icsc50631.2021.00083

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From a theoretical point of view, the number of schemes is too high to guarantee agreement between coders, and the lack of classification criteria or decision trees has led to difficulties in their use. Attempts to test the reliability of this instrument have achieved results ranging from fair [23,65] to satisfactory results by reducing the number of schemes to few categories [29], or involving expert annotators [78]. From a practical point of view, the use of schemes need to face the complexity of real texts, which often involve chained arguments or can be interpreted in different ways [78].…”

Section: Trends Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The theoretical development of schemes is crucial for the creation of "gold standard" corpora, namely annotated databases that can be used for training automatic classifiers [23]. Few databases of arguments are publicly available [61], and the training is often performed on private datasets whose reliability and coherence with argumentation schemes theory is not specified.…”

Section: Trends Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Few databases of arguments are publicly available [61], and the training is often performed on private datasets whose reliability and coherence with argumentation schemes theory is not specified. Very rarely do annotated corpora include detailed information about the coding procedure and accurate reliability measures [23].…”

Section: Trends Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

Macagno

2021

AAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Argumentation schemes [35,80,91] are a relatively recent notion that continues an extremely ancient debate on one of the foundations of human reasoning, human comprehension, and obviously human argumentation, i.e., the topics. To understand the revolutionary nature of Walton's work on this subject matter, it is necessary to place it in the debate that it continues and contributes to, namely a view of logic that is much broader than the formalistic perspective that has been adopted from the 20th century until nowadays. With his book Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning, Walton attempted to start a dialogue between three different fields or views on human reasoning -one (argumentation theory) very recent, one (dialectics) very ancient and with a very long tradition, and one (formal logic) relatively recent, but dominating in philosophy. Argumentation schemes were proposed as dialectical instruments, in the sense that they represented arguments not only as formal relations, but also as pragmatic inferences, as they at the same time depend on what the interlocutors share and accept in a given dialogical circumstance, and affect their dialogical relation.In this introduction, the notion of argumentation scheme will be analyzed in detail, showing its different dimensions and its defining features which make them an extremely useful instrument in Artificial Intelligence. This theoretical background will be followed by a literature review on the uses of the schemes in computing, aimed at identifying the most important areas and trends, the most promising proposals, and the directions of future research.

show abstract

Section: Trends Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trends Of Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

Macagno

2021

AAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the trained models using this data can be biased in a way that does not reflect the reality of a more rational and logical argumentation. Finally, the most recent argumentative corpus was presented in [39]. The authors present the ReCAP corpus of monologue argument graphs extracted from German education politics.…”

Section: Related Work: Other Computational Argumentation Corporamentioning

confidence: 99%

VivesDebate: A New Annotated Multilingual Corpus of Argumentation in a Debate Tournament

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The application of the latest Natural Language Processing breakthroughs in computational argumentation has shown promising results, which have raised the interest in this area of research. However, the available corpora with argumentative annotations are often limited to a very specific purpose or are not of adequate size to take advantage of state-of-the-art deep learning techniques (e.g., deep neural networks). In this paper, we present VivesDebate, a large, richly annotated and versatile professional debate corpus for computational argumentation research. The corpus has been created from 29 transcripts of a debate tournament in Catalan and has been machine-translated into Spanish and English. The annotation contains argumentative propositions, argumentative relations, debate interactions and professional evaluations of the arguments and argumentation. The presented corpus can be useful for research on a heterogeneous set of computational argumentation underlying tasks such as Argument Mining, Argument Analysis, Argument Evaluation or Argument Generation, among others. All this makes VivesDebate a valuable resource for computational argumentation research within the context of massive corpora aimed at Natural Language Processing tasks.

show abstract

“…Since the sample was randomly selected, the number of arguments per category varied according to the distribution of the corpus e in particular, the Argument from classification and the Argument from analogy had a lower distribution than the other arguments (rough 10). Previous attempts to test the reliability of argumentation schemes have resulted in contradictory outcomes e achieving results ranging from only fair(Dumani et al, 2021;Schneider et al, 2013) to satisfactory(Green, 2015;Visser et al, 2018). However, also these latter two studies present limitations, as the number of schemes was reduced to few specific categories, or the reliability testing procedure involved expert annotators and a very limited number of arguments coded.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation profiles and the manipulation of common ground. The arguments of populist leaders on Twitter

Macagno

2022

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ReCAP Corpus: A Corpus of Complex Argument Graphs on German Education Politics

Cited by 8 publications

References 21 publications

Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue

VivesDebate: A New Annotated Multilingual Corpus of Argumentation in a Debate Tournament

Argumentation profiles and the manipulation of common ground. The arguments of populist leaders on Twitter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About