A Community-Based Approach for Stance Distribution and Argument Organization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.16852v1
• Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2026 05:58:35 GMT
• Title: A Community-Based Approach for Stance Distribution and Argument Organization
• Abstract summary: We present an unsupervised graph-based approach for community-based argument organization.<n>We then employ community detection to identify argument communities that reveal homogeneous and heterogeneous viewpoint distributions.<n>Our approach requires no training data and can effectively process hundreds of articles while preserving nuanced relationships between arguments.
• Score: 18.378832846091594
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The proliferation of online debate platforms and social media has led to an unprecedented volume of argumentative content on controversial topics from multiple perspectives. While this wealth of perspectives offers opportunities for developing critical thinking and breaking filter bubbles (Pariser 2011), the sheer volume and complexity of arguments make it challenging for readers to synthesize and comprehend diverse viewpoints effectively. We present an unsupervised graph-based approach for community-based argument organization that helps users navigate and understand complex argumentative landscapes. Our system analyzes collections of topic-focused articles and constructs a rich interaction graph by capturing multiple relationship types between arguments: topic similarity, semantic coherence, shared keywords, and common entities. We then employ community detection to identify argument communities that reveal homogeneous and heterogeneous viewpoint distributions. The detected communities are simplified through strategic graph operations to present users with digestible, yet comprehensive summaries of key argumentative patterns. Our approach requires no training data and can effectively process hundreds of articles while preserving nuanced relationships between arguments. Experimental results demonstrate our system's ability to identify meaningful argument communities and present them in an interpretable manner, facilitating users' understanding of complex socio-political debates.

Related papers

• Stakeholder Suite: A Unified AI Framework for Mapping Actors, Topics and Arguments in Public Debates [3.272909051546268]
  This paper presents a framework deployed in operational contexts for mapping actors, topics, and arguments within public debates.<n>The tool has proven effective for operational use: helping project teams visualize networks of influence, identify emerging controversies, and support evidence-based decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-19T08:38:28Z)
• Explain Before You Answer: A Survey on Compositional Visual Reasoning [74.27548620675748]
  Compositional visual reasoning has emerged as a key research frontier in multimodal AI.<n>This survey systematically reviews 260+ papers from top venues (CVPR, ICCV, NeurIPS, ICML, ACL, etc.)<n>We then catalog 60+ benchmarks and corresponding metrics that probe compositional visual reasoning along dimensions such as grounding accuracy, chain-of-thought faithfulness, and high-resolution perception.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-24T11:01:51Z)
• Towards Comprehensive Argument Analysis in Education: Dataset, Tasks, and Method [14.718309497236694]
  We propose 14 fine-grained relation types from both vertical and horizontal dimensions.<n>We conduct experiments on three tasks: argument component detection, relation prediction, and automated essay grading.<n>The findings highlight the importance of fine-grained argumentative annotations for argumentative writing quality assessment and encourage multi-dimensional argument analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-17T14:36:51Z)
• Talking Point based Ideological Discourse Analysis in News Events [62.18747509565779]
  We propose a framework motivated by the theory of ideological discourse analysis to analyze news articles related to real-world events.<n>Our framework represents the news articles using a relational structure - talking points, which captures the interaction between entities, their roles, and media frames along with a topic of discussion.<n>We evaluate our framework's ability to generate these perspectives through automated tasks - ideology and partisan classification tasks, supplemented by human validation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T02:52:34Z)
• Overview of PerpectiveArg2024: The First Shared Task on Perspective Argument Retrieval [56.66761232081188]
  We present a novel dataset covering demographic and socio-cultural (socio) variables, such as age, gender, and political attitude, representing minority and majority groups in society. We find substantial challenges in incorporating perspectivism, especially when aiming for personalization based solely on the text of arguments without explicitly providing socio profiles. While we bootstrap perspective argument retrieval, further research is essential to optimize retrieval systems to facilitate personalization and reduce polarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T03:14:57Z)
• ArguMentor: Augmenting User Experiences with Counter-Perspectives [4.84187718353576]
  ArguMentor is a human-AI collaboration system that highlights claims in opinion pieces.<n>It identifies counter-arguments for them using a LLM and generates a context-based summary of based on current events.<n>It further enhances user understanding through additional features like a Q&A bot and DebateMe.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-04T21:43:56Z)
• PAKT: Perspectivized Argumentation Knowledge Graph and Tool for Deliberation Analysis (with Supplementary Materials) [18.436817251174357]
  We propose PAKT, a Perspectivized Argumentation Knowledge Graph and Tool. The graph structures the argumentative space across diverse topics, where arguments are divided into premises and conclusions. We show how to construct PAKT and conduct case studies on the obtained multifaceted argumentation graph.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T13:47:19Z)
• A Unifying Framework for Learning Argumentation Semantics [47.84663434179473]
  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.<n>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)
• Causal Reasoning Meets Visual Representation Learning: A Prospective Study [117.08431221482638]
  Lack of interpretability, robustness, and out-of-distribution generalization are becoming the challenges of the existing visual models. Inspired by the strong inference ability of human-level agents, recent years have witnessed great effort in developing causal reasoning paradigms. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of this emerging field, attract attention, encourage discussions, bring to the forefront the urgency of developing novel causal reasoning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-26T02:22:28Z)
• Author Clustering and Topic Estimation for Short Texts [69.54017251622211]
  We propose a novel model that expands on the Latent Dirichlet Allocation by modeling strong dependence among the words in the same document. We also simultaneously cluster users, removing the need for post-hoc cluster estimation. Our method performs as well as -- or better -- than traditional approaches to problems arising in short text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T20:55:55Z)
• 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)

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.