Language representations for computational argumentation

Argumentation is an essential feature and, arguably, one of the most exciting phenomena of natural language use. Accordingly, it has fascinated scholars and researchers in various fields, such as linguistics and philosophy, for long. Its computational analysis, falling under the notion of computational argumentation, is useful in a variety of domains of text for a range of applications. For instance, it can help to understand users’ stances in online discussion forums towards certain controversies, to provide targeted feedback to users for argumentative writing support, and to automatically summarize scientific publications. As in all natural language processing pipelines, the text we would like to analyze has to be introduced to computational argumentation models in the form of numeric features. Choosing such suitable semantic representations is considered a core challenge in natural language processing. In this context, research employing static and contextualized pretrained text embedding models has recently shown to reach state-of-the-art performances for a range of natural language processing tasks. However, previous work has noted the specific difficulty of computational argumentation scenarios with language representations as one of the main bottlenecks and called for targeted research on the intersection of the two fields. Still, the efforts focusing on the interplay between computational argumentation and representation learning have been few and far apart. This is despite (a) the fast-growing body of work in both computational argumentation and representation learning in general and (b) the fact that some of the open challenges are well known in the natural language processing community. In this thesis, we address this research gap and acknowledge the specific importance of research on the intersection of representation learning and computational argumentation. To this end, we (1) identify a series of challenges driven by inherent characteristics of argumentation in natural language and (2) present new analyses, corpora, and methods to address and mitigate each of the identified issues. Concretely, we focus on five main challenges pertaining to the current state-of-the-art in computational argumentation: (C1) External knowledge: static and contextualized language representations encode distributional knowledge only. We propose two approaches to complement this knowledge with knowledge from external resources. First, we inject lexico-semantic knowledge through an additional prediction objective in the pretraining stage. In a second study, we demonstrate how to inject conceptual knowledge post hoc employing the adapter framework. We show the effectiveness of these approaches on general natural language understanding and argumentative reasoning tasks. (C2) Domain knowledge: pretrained language representations are typically trained on big and general-domain corpora. We study the trade-off between employing such large and general-domain corpora versus smaller and domain-specific corpora for training static word embeddings which we evaluate in the analysis of scientific arguments. (C3) Complementarity of knowledge across tasks: many computational argumentation tasks are interrelated but are typically studied in isolation. In two case studies, we show the effectiveness of sharing knowledge across tasks. First, based on a corpus of scientific texts, which we extend with a new annotation layer reflecting fine-grained argumentative structures, we show that coupling the argumentative analysis with other rhetorical analysis tasks leads to performance improvements for the higher-level tasks. In the second case study, we focus on assessing the argumentative quality of texts. To this end, we present a new multi-domain corpus annotated with ratings reflecting different dimensions of argument quality. We then demonstrate the effectiveness of sharing knowledge across the different quality dimensions in multi-task learning setups. (C4) Multilinguality: argumentation arguably exists in all cultures and languages around the globe. To foster inclusive computational argumentation technologies, we dissect the current state-of-the-art in zero-shot cross-lingual transfer. We show big drops in performance when it comes to resource-lean and typologically distant target languages. Based on this finding, we analyze the reasons for these losses and propose to move to inexpensive few-shot target-language transfer, leading to consistent performance improvements in higher-level semantic tasks, e.g., argumentative reasoning. (C5) Ethical considerations: envisioned computational argumentation applications, e.g., systems for self-determined opinion formation, are highly sensitive. We first discuss which ethical aspects should be considered when representing natural language for computational argumentation tasks. Focusing on the issue of unfair stereotypical bias, we then conduct a multi-dimensional analysis of the amount of bias in monolingual and cross-lingual embedding spaces. In the next step, we devise a general framework for implicit and explicit bias evaluation and debiasing. Employing intrinsic bias measures and benchmarks reflecting the semantic quality of the embeddings, we demonstrate the effectiveness of new debiasing methods, which we propose. Finally, we complement this analysis by testing the original as well as the debiased language representations for stereotypically unfair bias in argumentative inferences. We hope that our contributions in language representations for computational argumentation fuel more research on the intersection of the two fields and contribute to fair, efficient, and effective natural language processing technologies

Probing with Noise: Unpicking the Warp and Weft of Taxonomic and Thematic Meaning Representations in Static and Contextual Embeddings

The semantic relatedness of words has two key dimensions: it can be based on taxonomic information or thematic, co-occurrence-based information. These are captured by different language resources—taxonomies and natural corpora—from which we can build different computational meaning representations that are able to reflect these relationships. Vector representations are arguably the most popular meaning representations in NLP, encoding information in a shared multidimensional semantic space and allowing for distances between points to reflect relatedness between items that populate the space. Improving our understanding of how different types of linguistic information are encoded in vector space can provide valuable insights to the field of model interpretability and can further our understanding of different encoder architectures. Alongside vector dimensions, we argue that information can be encoded in more implicit ways and hypothesise that it is possible for the vector magnitude—the norm—to also carry linguistic information. We develop a method to test this hypothesis and provide a systematic exploration of the role of the vector norm in encoding the different axes of semantic relatedness across a variety of vector representations, including taxonomic, thematic, static and contextual embeddings. The method is an extension of the standard probing framework and allows for relative intrinsic interpretations of probing results. It relies on introducing targeted noise that ablates information encoded in embeddings and is grounded by solid baselines and confidence intervals. We call the method probing with noise and test the method at both the word and sentence level, on a host of established linguistic probing tasks, as well as two new semantic probing tasks: hypernymy and idiomatic usage detection. Our experiments show that the method is able to provide geometric insights into embeddings and can demonstrate whether the norm encodes the linguistic information being probed for. This confirms the existence of separate information containers in English word2vec, GloVe and BERT embeddings. The experiments and complementary analyses show that different encoders encode different kinds of linguistic information in the norm: taxonomic vectors store hypernym-hyponym information in the norm, while non-taxonomic vectors do not. Meanwhile, non-taxonomic GloVe embeddings encode syntactic and sentence length information in the vector norm, while the contextual BERT encodes contextual incongruity. Our method can thus reveal where in the embeddings certain information is contained. Furthermore, it can be supplemented by an array of post-hoc analyses that reveal how information is encoded as well, thus offering valuable structural and geometric insights into the different types of embeddings

Computational approaches to semantic change (Volume 6)

Semantic change — how the meanings of words change over time — has preoccupied scholars since well before modern linguistics emerged in the late 19th and early 20th century, ushering in a new methodological turn in the study of language change. Compared to changes in sound and grammar, semantic change is the least understood. Ever since, the study of semantic change has progressed steadily, accumulating a vast store of knowledge for over a century, encompassing many languages and language families. Historical linguists also early on realized the potential of computers as research tools, with papers at the very first international conferences in computational linguistics in the 1960s. Such computational studies still tended to be small-scale, method-oriented, and qualitative. However, recent years have witnessed a sea-change in this regard. Big-data empirical quantitative investigations are now coming to the forefront, enabled by enormous advances in storage capability and processing power. Diachronic corpora have grown beyond imagination, defying exploration by traditional manual qualitative methods, and language technology has become increasingly data-driven and semantics-oriented. These developments present a golden opportunity for the empirical study of semantic change over both long and short time spans

EVALITA Evaluation of NLP and Speech Tools for Italian - December 17th, 2020

Welcome to EVALITA 2020! EVALITA is the evaluation campaign of Natural Language Processing and Speech Tools for Italian. EVALITA is an initiative of the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics (AILC, http://www.ai-lc.it) and it is endorsed by the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AIxIA, http://www.aixia.it) and the Italian Association for Speech Sciences (AISV, http://www.aisv.it)

Proceedings of the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics CLiC-it 2018 : 10-12 December 2018, Torino

On behalf of the Program Committee, a very warm welcome to the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-­‐it 2018). This edition of the conference is held in Torino. The conference is locally organised by the University of Torino and hosted into its prestigious main lecture hall “Cavallerizza Reale”. The CLiC-­‐it conference series is an initiative of the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics (AILC) which, after five years of activity, has clearly established itself as the premier national forum for research and development in the fields of Computational Linguistics and Natural Language Processing, where leading researchers and practitioners from academia and industry meet to share their research results, experiences, and challenges

Proceedings of the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics CLiC-it 2018

On behalf of the Program Committee, a very warm welcome to the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-­‐it 2018). This edition of the conference is held in Torino. The conference is locally organised by the University of Torino and hosted into its prestigious main lecture hall “Cavallerizza Reale”. The CLiC-­‐it conference series is an initiative of the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics (AILC) which, after five years of activity, has clearly established itself as the premier national forum for research and development in the fields of Computational Linguistics and Natural Language Processing, where leading researchers and practitioners from academia and industry meet to share their research results, experiences, and challenges