Revisiting computational models of argument schemes: Classification, annotation, comparison

Jacky Visser (Lead / Corresponding author), John Lawrence, Jean Wagemans, Chris Reed

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

4 Citations (Scopus)
243 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In this paper, we present an in-depth comparative analysis of two classifications of argument schemes: Walton's typology and Wagemans' Periodic Table of Arguments. We describe annotation guidelines for each classification and apply these to a corpus of arguments from the 2016 US presidential debates. In so doing, we achieve substantial inter-annotator agreement, and produce what, to the best of our knowledge, are the two largest and most reliably annotated corpora of argument schemes in dialogical argumentation publicly available. In describing the creation and comparison of these corpora, we discuss the strengths of each, with an eye towards both computational modelling and argument mining.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationComputational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2018
EditorsSanjay Modgil, Katarzyna Budzynska, John Lawrence, Katarzyna Budzynska
PublisherIOS Press
Pages313-324
Number of pages12
Volume305
ISBN (Print)9781614999058
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018
Event7th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2018 - Warsaw, Poland
Duration: 12 Sep 201814 Sep 2018

Publication series

NameFrontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
Volume305
ISSN (Print)0922-6389

Conference

Conference7th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument, COMMA 2018
CountryPoland
CityWarsaw
Period12/09/1814/09/18

Keywords

  • Annotation
  • Argument mining
  • Argument schemes
  • Classification
  • Corpus

Cite this