Semi-Supervised Cleansing of Web Argument Corpora

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2011.01798v1
• Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 15:45:42 GMT
• Title: Semi-Supervised Cleansing of Web Argument Corpora
• Authors: Jonas Dorsch and Henning Wachsmuth
• Abstract summary: Debate portals and similar web platforms constitute one of the main text sources in computational argumentation research. In this paper, we present a precision-oriented approach to detecting such irrelevant text in a semi-supervised way. In the existing args.me corpus with 400k argumentative texts, our approach detects almost 87k irrelevant sentences, at a precision of 0.97 according to manual evaluation.
• Score: 20.65183968971417
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Debate portals and similar web platforms constitute one of the main text sources in computational argumentation research and its applications. While the corpora built upon these sources are rich of argumentatively relevant content and structure, they also include text that is irrelevant, or even detrimental, to their purpose. In this paper, we present a precision-oriented approach to detecting such irrelevant text in a semi-supervised way. Given a few seed examples, the approach automatically learns basic lexical patterns of relevance and irrelevance and then incrementally bootstraps new patterns from sentences matching the patterns. In the existing args.me corpus with 400k argumentative texts, our approach detects almost 87k irrelevant sentences, at a precision of 0.97 according to manual evaluation. With low effort, the approach can be adapted to other web argument corpora, providing a generic way to improve corpus quality.

Related papers

• Localizing Factual Inconsistencies in Attributable Text Generation [91.981439746404]
  We introduce QASemConsistency, a new formalism for localizing factual inconsistencies in attributable text generation. We first demonstrate the effectiveness of the QASemConsistency methodology for human annotation. We then implement several methods for automatically detecting localized factual inconsistencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T22:53:48Z)
• Copy Is All You Need [66.00852205068327]
  We formulate text generation as progressively copying text segments from an existing text collection. Our approach achieves better generation quality according to both automatic and human evaluations. Our approach attains additional performance gains by simply scaling up to larger text collections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-13T05:03:26Z)
• Verifying the Robustness of Automatic Credibility Assessment [50.55687778699995]
  We show that meaning-preserving changes in input text can mislead the models. We also introduce BODEGA: a benchmark for testing both victim models and attack methods on misinformation detection tasks. Our experimental results show that modern large language models are often more vulnerable to attacks than previous, smaller solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-14T16:11:47Z)
• A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publications [0.02578242050187029]
  This paper presents two datasets comprised of artificially generated research content. In the first case, the content is completely generated by the GPT-2 model after a short prompt extracted from original papers. The partial or hybrid dataset is created by replacing several sentences of abstracts with sentences that are generated by the Arxiv-NLP model. We evaluate the quality of the datasets comparing the generated texts to aligned original texts using fluency metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-04T08:16:56Z)
• On The Ingredients of an Effective Zero-shot Semantic Parser [95.01623036661468]
  We analyze zero-shot learning by paraphrasing training examples of canonical utterances and programs from a grammar. We propose bridging these gaps using improved grammars, stronger paraphrasers, and efficient learning methods. Our model achieves strong performance on two semantic parsing benchmarks (Scholar, Geo) with zero labeled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-15T21:41:16Z)
• Generating Informative Conclusions for Argumentative Texts [32.3103908466811]
  The purpose of an argumentative text is to support a certain conclusion. An explicit conclusion makes for a good candidate summary of an argumentative text. This is especially true if the conclusion is informative, emphasizing specific concepts from the text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T10:35:59Z)
• Corpus-Based Paraphrase Detection Experiments and Review [0.0]
  Paraphrase detection is important for a number of applications, including plagiarism detection, authorship attribution, question answering, text summarization, etc. In this paper, we give a performance overview of various types of corpus-based models, especially deep learning (DL) models, with the task of paraphrase detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-31T23:29:24Z)
• Sentiment analysis in tweets: an assessment study from classical to modern text representation models [59.107260266206445]
  Short texts published on Twitter have earned significant attention as a rich source of information. Their inherent characteristics, such as the informal, and noisy linguistic style, remain challenging to many natural language processing (NLP) tasks. This study fulfils an assessment of existing language models in distinguishing the sentiment expressed in tweets by using a rich collection of 22 datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-29T21:05:28Z)
• Automatically Ranked Russian Paraphrase Corpus for Text Generation [0.0]
  The article is focused on automatic development and ranking of a large corpus for Russian paraphrase generation. Existing manually annotated paraphrase datasets for Russian are limited to small-sized ParaPhraser corpus and ParaPlag.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-17T08:40:52Z)
• Extractive Summarization as Text Matching [123.09816729675838]
  This paper creates a paradigm shift with regard to the way we build neural extractive summarization systems. We formulate the extractive summarization task as a semantic text matching problem. We have driven the state-of-the-art extractive result on CNN/DailyMail to a new level (44.41 in ROUGE-1)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-19T08:27:57Z)
• WAC: A Corpus of Wikipedia Conversations for Online Abuse Detection [0.0]
  We propose an original framework, based on the Wikipedia Comment corpus, with comment-level annotations of different types. This large corpus of more than 380k annotated messages opens perspectives for online abuse detection and especially for context-based approaches. We also propose, in addition to this corpus, a complete benchmarking platform to stimulate and fairly compare scientific works around the problem of content abuse detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-13T10:26:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.