@inproceedings{el-baff-etal-2019-computational,
title = "Computational Argumentation Synthesis as a Language Modeling Task",
author = "El Baff, Roxanne and
Wachsmuth, Henning and
Al Khatib, Khalid and
Stede, Manfred and
Stein, Benno",
editor = "van Deemter, Kees and
Lin, Chenghua and
Takamura, Hiroya",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Generation",
month = oct # "{--}" # nov,
year = "2019",
address = "Tokyo, Japan",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/W19-8607",
doi = "10.18653/v1/W19-8607",
pages = "54--64",
abstract = "Synthesis approaches in computational argumentation so far are restricted to generating claim-like argument units or short summaries of debates. Ultimately, however, we expect computers to generate whole new arguments for a given stance towards some topic, backing up claims following argumentative and rhetorical considerations. In this paper, we approach such an argumentation synthesis as a language modeling task. In our language model, argumentative discourse units are the {``}words{''}, and arguments represent the {``}sentences{''}. Given a pool of units for any unseen topic-stance pair, the model selects a set of unit types according to a basic rhetorical strategy (logos vs. pathos), arranges the structure of the types based on the units{'} argumentative roles, and finally {``}phrases{''} an argument by instantiating the structure with semantically coherent units from the pool. Our evaluation suggests that the model can, to some extent, mimic the human synthesis of strategy-specific arguments.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="el-baff-etal-2019-computational">
<titleInfo>
<title>Computational Argumentation Synthesis as a Language Modeling Task</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Roxanne</namePart>
<namePart type="family">El Baff</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Henning</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wachsmuth</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Khalid</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Al Khatib</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Manfred</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Stede</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Benno</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Stein</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2019-oct–nov</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Generation</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Kees</namePart>
<namePart type="family">van Deemter</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Chenghua</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Lin</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hiroya</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Takamura</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Tokyo, Japan</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Synthesis approaches in computational argumentation so far are restricted to generating claim-like argument units or short summaries of debates. Ultimately, however, we expect computers to generate whole new arguments for a given stance towards some topic, backing up claims following argumentative and rhetorical considerations. In this paper, we approach such an argumentation synthesis as a language modeling task. In our language model, argumentative discourse units are the “words”, and arguments represent the “sentences”. Given a pool of units for any unseen topic-stance pair, the model selects a set of unit types according to a basic rhetorical strategy (logos vs. pathos), arranges the structure of the types based on the units’ argumentative roles, and finally “phrases” an argument by instantiating the structure with semantically coherent units from the pool. Our evaluation suggests that the model can, to some extent, mimic the human synthesis of strategy-specific arguments.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">el-baff-etal-2019-computational</identifier>
<identifier type="doi">10.18653/v1/W19-8607</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/W19-8607</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2019-oct–nov</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>54</start>
<end>64</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Computational Argumentation Synthesis as a Language Modeling Task
%A El Baff, Roxanne
%A Wachsmuth, Henning
%A Al Khatib, Khalid
%A Stede, Manfred
%A Stein, Benno
%Y van Deemter, Kees
%Y Lin, Chenghua
%Y Takamura, Hiroya
%S Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Natural Language Generation
%D 2019
%8 oct–nov
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Tokyo, Japan
%F el-baff-etal-2019-computational
%X Synthesis approaches in computational argumentation so far are restricted to generating claim-like argument units or short summaries of debates. Ultimately, however, we expect computers to generate whole new arguments for a given stance towards some topic, backing up claims following argumentative and rhetorical considerations. In this paper, we approach such an argumentation synthesis as a language modeling task. In our language model, argumentative discourse units are the “words”, and arguments represent the “sentences”. Given a pool of units for any unseen topic-stance pair, the model selects a set of unit types according to a basic rhetorical strategy (logos vs. pathos), arranges the structure of the types based on the units’ argumentative roles, and finally “phrases” an argument by instantiating the structure with semantically coherent units from the pool. Our evaluation suggests that the model can, to some extent, mimic the human synthesis of strategy-specific arguments.
%R 10.18653/v1/W19-8607
%U https://aclanthology.org/W19-8607
%U https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-8607
%P 54-64
Markdown (Informal)
[Computational Argumentation Synthesis as a Language Modeling Task](https://aclanthology.org/W19-8607) (El Baff et al., INLG 2019)
ACL