Understanding Enthymemes in Argument Maps: Bridging Argument Mining and Logic-based Argumentation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08648v1
• Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 10:30:30 GMT
• Title: Understanding Enthymemes in Argument Maps: Bridging Argument Mining and Logic-based Argumentation
• Authors: Jonathan Ben-Naim, Victor David, Anthony Hunter,
• Abstract summary: In this paper, we assume that an argument map contains the premises and claims of arguments, and support and attack relationships between them. To understand and to automatically analyse that argument map, it would be desirable to instantiate that argument map with logical arguments. We address this need by using classical logic for representing the explicit information in the text, and using default logic for representing the implicit information in the text.
• Score: 11.633929083694388
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Argument mining is natural language processing technology aimed at identifying arguments in text. Furthermore, the approach is being developed to identify the premises and claims of those arguments, and to identify the relationships between arguments including support and attack relationships. In this paper, we assume that an argument map contains the premises and claims of arguments, and support and attack relationships between them, that have been identified by argument mining. So from a piece of text, we assume an argument map is obtained automatically by natural language processing. However, to understand and to automatically analyse that argument map, it would be desirable to instantiate that argument map with logical arguments. Once we have the logical representation of the arguments in an argument map, we can use automated reasoning to analyze the argumentation (e.g. check consistency of premises, check validity of claims, and check the labelling on each arc corresponds with thw logical arguments). We address this need by using classical logic for representing the explicit information in the text, and using default logic for representing the implicit information in the text. In order to investigate our proposal, we consider some specific options for instantiation.

Related papers

• A Unifying Framework for Learning Argumentation Semantics [50.69905074548764]
  We present a novel framework, which uses an Inductive Logic Programming approach to learn the acceptability semantics for several abstract and structured argumentation frameworks in an interpretable way. Our framework outperforms existing argumentation solvers, thus opening up new future research directions in the area of formal argumentation and human-machine dialogues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T20:18:05Z)
• Some Options for Instantiation of Bipolar Argument Graphs with Deductive Arguments [4.111899441919164]
  A bipolar argument graph is a directed graph where each node denotes an argument, and each arc denotes the influence of one argument on another. In a bipolar argument graph, each argument is atomic and so it has no internal structure. This paper presents a framework based on the use of logical arguments to instantiate bipolar argument graphs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T16:22:27Z)
• ArgU: A Controllable Factual Argument Generator [0.0]
  ArgU is a neural argument generator capable of producing factual arguments from input facts and real-world concepts. We have compiled and released an annotated corpora of 69,428 arguments spanning six topics and six argument schemes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-09T10:49:45Z)
• On resolving conflicts between arguments [0.0]
  In legal argumentation, meta-rules determine the valid arguments by considering the last defeasible rule of each argument involved in a conflict. We propose a new argument system where, instead of deriving a defeat relation between arguments, emphundercutting-arguments for the defeat of defeasible rules are constructed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-20T16:31:19Z)
• Discourse-Aware Graph Networks for Textual Logical Reasoning [142.0097357999134]
  Passage-level logical relations represent entailment or contradiction between propositional units (e.g., a concluding sentence) We propose logic structural-constraint modeling to solve the logical reasoning QA and introduce discourse-aware graph networks (DAGNs) The networks first construct logic graphs leveraging in-line discourse connectives and generic logic theories, then learn logic representations by end-to-end evolving the logic relations with an edge-reasoning mechanism and updating the graph features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-04T14:38:49Z)
• Towards Full-Fledged Argument Search: A Framework for Extracting and Clustering Arguments from Unstructured Text [0.0]
  Argument search aims at identifying arguments in natural language texts. Existing frameworks address only specific components of argument search. We propose a framework for addressing these shortcomings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-30T23:05:05Z)
• A Formalisation of Abstract Argumentation in Higher-Order Logic [77.34726150561087]
  We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic. This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentation frameworks using interactive and automated reasoning tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-18T10:45:59Z)
• Reinforcement Learning-based Dialogue Guided Event Extraction to Exploit Argument Relations [70.35379323231241]
  This paper presents a better approach for event extraction by explicitly utilizing the relationships of event arguments. We employ reinforcement learning and incremental learning to extract multiple arguments via a multi-turned, iterative process. Experimental results show that our approach consistently outperforms seven state-of-the-art event extraction methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-23T13:24:39Z)
• Logic-Driven Context Extension and Data Augmentation for Logical Reasoning of Text [65.24325614642223]
  We propose to understand logical symbols and expressions in the text to arrive at the answer. Based on such logical information, we put forward a context extension framework and a data augmentation algorithm. Our method achieves the state-of-the-art performance, and both logic-driven context extension framework and data augmentation algorithm can help improve the accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-08T10:09:36Z)
• Extracting Implicitly Asserted Propositions in Argumentation [8.20413690846954]
  We study methods for extracting propositions implicitly asserted in questions, reported speech, and imperatives in argumentation. Our study may inform future research on argument mining and the semantics of these rhetorical devices in argumentation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-06T12:03:47Z)
• 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.