A Pilot Study in Using Argumentation Frameworks for Online Debates

We describe a pilot study in using argumentation frameworks obtained from an online debate to evaluate positions expressed in the debate. This pilot study aims at exploring the richness of Computational Argumentation methods and techniques for evaluating arguments to reason with the output of Argument Mining. It uses a hand-generated graphical representation of the debate as an intermediate representation from which argumentation frameworks can be extracted, but richer than any existing argumentation framework. The intermediate representation can provide insights for benchmark sets derived from online debates.

[1]  Paolo Torroni,et al.  Argument Mining: A Machine Learning Perspective , 2015, TAFA.

[2]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  Automatic evaluation of design alternatives with quantitative argumentation , 2015, Argument Comput..

[3]  Sarit Kraus,et al.  Providing Arguments in Discussions Based on the Prediction of Human Argumentative Behavior , 2015, AAAI.

[4]  Hannes Strass,et al.  Abstract Dialectical Frameworks Revisited , 2013, IJCAI.

[5]  Ur Informationssysteme,et al.  Answer-Set Programming Encodings for Argumentation Frameworks , 2008 .

[6]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  An introduction to argumentation semantics , 2011, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[7]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  Comparing and Integrating Argumentation-Based with Matrix-Based Decision Support in Arg&Dec , 2015, TAFA.

[8]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[9]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Elements of Argumentation , 2007, ECSQARU.

[10]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argumentation in artificial intelligence , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[11]  Iyad Rahwan,et al.  Representing and classifying arguments on the Semantic Web , 2011, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[12]  Marie-Francine Moens,et al.  Argumentation Mining: Where are we now, where do we want to be and how do we get there? , 2013, FIRE.

[13]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  Discontinuity-Free Decision Support with Quantitative Argumentation Debates , 2016, KR.

[14]  Nava Tintarev,et al.  Formal Arguments, Preferences, and Natural Language Interfaces to Humans: an Empirical Evaluation , 2014, ECAI.

[15]  Manfred Stede,et al.  From Argument Diagrams to Argumentation Mining in Texts: A Survey , 2013, Int. J. Cogn. Informatics Nat. Intell..

[16]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  Encompassing Attacks to Attacks in Abstract Argumentation Frameworks , 2009, ECSQARU.

[17]  Nicolas Maudet,et al.  A Comparative Study of Ranking-Based Semantics for Abstract Argumentation , 2016, AAAI.

[18]  Guillermo Ricardo Simari,et al.  Towards an argument interchange format , 2006, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[19]  Stefan Woltran,et al.  GRAPPA: A Semantical Framework for Graph-Based Argument Processing , 2014, ECAI.

[20]  Pietro Baroni,et al.  AFRA: Argumentation framework with recursive attacks , 2011, Int. J. Approx. Reason..