tailieunhanh - Báo cáo khoa học: "Classifying Arguments by Scheme"

Argumentation schemes are structures or templates for various kinds of arguments. Given the text of an argument with premises and conclusion identified, we classify it as an instance of one of five common schemes, using features specific to each scheme. We achieve accuracies of 63–91% in one-against-others classification and 80–94% in pairwise classification (baseline = 50% in both cases). | Classifying Arguments by Scheme Vanessa Wei Feng Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto ON M5S 3G4 Canada weifeng@ Graeme Hirst Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto ON M5S 3G4 Canada gh@ Abstract Argumentation schemes are structures or templates for various kinds of arguments. Given the text of an argument with premises and conclusion identified we classify it as an instance of one of five common schemes using features specific to each scheme. We achieve accuracies of 63-91 in one-against-others classification and 80-94 in pairwise classification baseline 50 in both cases . 1 Introduction We investigate a new task in the computational analysis of arguments the classification of arguments by the argumentation schemes that they use. An argumentation scheme informally is a framework or structure for a possibly defeasible argument we will give a more-formal definition and examples in Section 3. Our work is motivated by the need to determine the unstated or implicitly stated premises that arguments written in natural language normally draw on. Such premises are called enthymemes. For instance the argument in Example 1 consists of one explicit premise the first sentence and a conclusion the second sentence Example 1 Premise The survival of the entire world is at stake. Conclusion The treaties and covenants aiming for a world free of nuclear arsenals and other conventional and biological weapons of mass destruction should be adhered to scrupulously by all nations. Another premise is left implicit Adhering to those treaties and covenants is a means of realizing survival of the entire world . This proposition is an enthymeme of this argument. Our ultimate goal is to reconstruct the en-thymemes in an argument because determining these unstated assumptions is an integral part of understanding supporting or attacking an entire argument. Hence reconstructing enthymemes is an important problem in argument