The 10.000-Argument Rule: Adequacy in Theories of Argument Structure

Ella Schad; Annette Hautli-Janisz; Chris Reed

The 10.000-Argument Rule: Adequacy in Theories of Argument Structure

Ella Schad, Annette Hautli-Janisz, Chris Reed

Computing

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

31 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Whilst different areas of argumentation theory might focus upon different phenomena, or offer competing accounts, there is unspoken consensus that foundational features such as linked-ness, convergence and even support or attack should be reliably distinguishable in the wild. After detailed analysis of more than ten thousand arguments in the QT30 corpus (Hautli-Janisz et al. 2022a, b), it seems as though this consensus view is false, challenging fundamental notions of descriptive adequacy from across argumentation theory.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Proceedings of the Tenth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation
Pages	796-812
Number of pages	17
Publication status	Published - 2024
Event	10th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation - Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands Duration: 4 Jul 2023 → 7 Jul 2023 https://ilias-argumentation.com/issa/

Conference

Conference	10th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation
Abbreviated title	ISSA 2023
Country/Territory	Netherlands
City	Leiden
Period	4/07/23 → 7/07/23
Internet address	https://ilias-argumentation.com/issa/

Keywords

annotator disagreement
argument analysis
theoretical foundations

Access to Document

Final Published VersionFinal published version, 2.31 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@inproceedings{4ba7961a78414ec298ccce275fca7f65,

title = "The 10.000-Argument Rule: Adequacy in Theories of Argument Structure",

abstract = " Whilst different areas of argumentation theory might focus upon different phenomena, or offer competing accounts, there is unspoken consensus that foundational features such as linked-ness, convergence and even support or attack should be reliably distinguishable in the wild. After detailed analysis of more than ten thousand arguments in the QT30 corpus (Hautli-Janisz et al. 2022a, b), it seems as though this consensus view is false, challenging fundamental notions of descriptive adequacy from across argumentation theory.",

keywords = "annotator disagreement, argument analysis, theoretical foundations",

author = "Ella Schad and Annette Hautli-Janisz and Chris Reed",

year = "2024",

language = "English",

pages = "796--812",

booktitle = "Proceedings of the Tenth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation",

note = "10th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation , ISSA 2023 ; Conference date: 04-07-2023 Through 07-07-2023",

url = "https://ilias-argumentation.com/issa/",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - The 10.000-Argument Rule

T2 - 10th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation

AU - Schad, Ella

AU - Hautli-Janisz, Annette

AU - Reed, Chris

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - Whilst different areas of argumentation theory might focus upon different phenomena, or offer competing accounts, there is unspoken consensus that foundational features such as linked-ness, convergence and even support or attack should be reliably distinguishable in the wild. After detailed analysis of more than ten thousand arguments in the QT30 corpus (Hautli-Janisz et al. 2022a, b), it seems as though this consensus view is false, challenging fundamental notions of descriptive adequacy from across argumentation theory.

AB - Whilst different areas of argumentation theory might focus upon different phenomena, or offer competing accounts, there is unspoken consensus that foundational features such as linked-ness, convergence and even support or attack should be reliably distinguishable in the wild. After detailed analysis of more than ten thousand arguments in the QT30 corpus (Hautli-Janisz et al. 2022a, b), it seems as though this consensus view is false, challenging fundamental notions of descriptive adequacy from across argumentation theory.

KW - annotator disagreement

KW - argument analysis

KW - theoretical foundations

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 796

EP - 812

BT - Proceedings of the Tenth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation

Y2 - 4 July 2023 through 7 July 2023

ER -

The 10.000-Argument Rule: Adequacy in Theories of Argument Structure

Abstract

Conference

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this