OpenDebateEvidence: A Massive-Scale Argument Mining and Summarization Dataset

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.14657v3
• Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 03:41:03 GMT
• Title: OpenDebateEvidence: A Massive-Scale Argument Mining and Summarization Dataset
• Authors: Allen Roush, Yusuf Shabazz, Arvind Balaji, Peter Zhang, Stefano Mezza, Markus Zhang, Sanjay Basu, Sriram Vishwanath, Mehdi Fatemi, Ravid Shwartz-Ziv,
• Abstract summary: OpenDebateEvidence is a comprehensive dataset for argument mining and summarization sourced from the American Debate Competitive community. This dataset includes over 3.5 million documents with rich metadata, making it one of the most extensive collections of debate evidence.
• Score: 10.385189302526246
• License:
• Abstract: We introduce OpenDebateEvidence, a comprehensive dataset for argument mining and summarization sourced from the American Competitive Debate community. This dataset includes over 3.5 million documents with rich metadata, making it one of the most extensive collections of debate evidence. OpenDebateEvidence captures the complexity of arguments in high school and college debates, providing valuable resources for training and evaluation. Our extensive experiments demonstrate the efficacy of fine-tuning state-of-the-art large language models for argumentative abstractive summarization across various methods, models, and datasets. By providing this comprehensive resource, we aim to advance computational argumentation and support practical applications for debaters, educators, and researchers. OpenDebateEvidence is publicly available to support further research and innovation in computational argumentation. Access it here: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Yusuf5/OpenCaselist

Related papers

• Debatrix: Multi-dimensional Debate Judge with Iterative Chronological Analysis Based on LLM [51.43102092480804]
  Debatrix is an automated debate judge based on Large Language Models (LLMs) To align with real-world debate scenarios, we introduced the PanelBench benchmark, comparing our system's performance to actual debate outcomes. The findings indicate a notable enhancement over directly using LLMs for debate evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-12T18:19:47Z)
• DebateKG: Automatic Policy Debate Case Creation with Semantic Knowledge Graphs [0.0]
  We show that effective debate cases can be constructed using constrained shortest path traversals on Argumentative Semantic Knowledge Graphs. We significantly improve upon DebateSum by introducing 53180 new examples. We create a unique method for evaluating which knowledge graphs are better in the context of producing policy debate cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-09T04:19:19Z)
• ConvFinQA: Exploring the Chain of Numerical Reasoning in Conversational Finance Question Answering [70.6359636116848]
  We propose a new large-scale dataset, ConvFinQA, to study the chain of numerical reasoning in conversational question answering. Our dataset poses great challenge in modeling long-range, complex numerical reasoning paths in real-world conversations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-07T23:48:50Z)
• Diversity Over Size: On the Effect of Sample and Topic Sizes for Topic-Dependent Argument Mining Datasets [49.65208986436848]
  We investigate the effect of Argument Mining dataset composition in few- and zero-shot settings. Our findings show that, while fine-tuning is mandatory to achieve acceptable model performance, using carefully composed training samples and reducing the training sample size by up to almost 90% can still yield 95% of the maximum performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T17:14:32Z)
• IAM: A Comprehensive and Large-Scale Dataset for Integrated Argument Mining Tasks [59.457948080207174]
  In this work, we introduce a comprehensive and large dataset named IAM, which can be applied to a series of argument mining tasks. Near 70k sentences in the dataset are fully annotated based on their argument properties. We propose two new integrated argument mining tasks associated with the debate preparation process: (1) claim extraction with stance classification (CESC) and (2) claim-evidence pair extraction (CEPE)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-23T08:07:32Z)
• ConvoSumm: Conversation Summarization Benchmark and Improved Abstractive Summarization with Argument Mining [61.82562838486632]
  We crowdsource four new datasets on diverse online conversation forms of news comments, discussion forums, community question answering forums, and email threads. We benchmark state-of-the-art models on our datasets and analyze characteristics associated with the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-01T22:17:13Z)
• Argument Mining Driven Analysis of Peer-Reviews [4.552676857046446]
  We propose an Argument Mining based approach for the assistance of editors, meta-reviewers, and reviewers. One of our findings is that arguments used in the peer-review process differ from arguments in other domains making the transfer of pre-trained models difficult. We provide the community with a new peer-review dataset from different computer science conferences with annotated arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-10T16:06:21Z)
• High Quality Real-Time Structured Debate Generation [0.0]
  We define debate trees and paths for generating debates while enforcing a high level structure and grammar. We leverage a large corpus of tree-structured debates that have metadata associated with each argument. Our results demonstrate the ability to generate debates in real-time on complex topics at a quality that is close to humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-01T01:39:38Z)
• DebateSum: A large-scale argument mining and summarization dataset [0.0]
  DebateSum consists of 187,386 unique pieces of evidence with corresponding argument and extractive summaries. We train several transformer summarization models to benchmark summarization performance on DebateSum. We present a search engine for this dataset which is utilized extensively by members of the National Speech and Debate Association.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-14T10:06:57Z)
• Aspect-Controlled Neural Argument Generation [65.91772010586605]
  We train a language model for argument generation that can be controlled on a fine-grained level to generate sentence-level arguments for a given topic, stance, and aspect. Our evaluation shows that our generation model is able to generate high-quality, aspect-specific arguments. These arguments can be used to improve the performance of stance detection models via data augmentation and to generate counter-arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-30T20:17:22Z)

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.