Viewpoint Discovery and Understanding in Social Networks

The Web has evolved to a dominant platform where everyone has the opportunity to express their opinions, to interact with other users, and to debate on emerging events happening around the world. On the one hand, this has enabled the presence of different viewpoints and opinions about a - usually controversial - topic (like Brexit), but at the same time, it has led to phenomena like media bias, echo chambers and filter bubbles, where users are exposed to only one point of view on the same topic. Therefore, there is the need for methods that are able to detect and explain the different viewpoints. In this paper, we propose a graph partitioning method that exploits social interactions to enable the discovery of different communities (representing different viewpoints) discussing about a controversial topic in a social network like Twitter. To explain the discovered viewpoints, we describe a method, called Iterative Rank Difference (IRD), which allows detecting descriptive terms that characterize the different viewpoints as well as understanding how a specific term is related to a viewpoint (by detecting other related descriptive terms). The results of an experimental evaluation showed that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art methods on viewpoint discovery, while a qualitative analysis of the proposed IRD method on three different controversial topics showed that IRD provides comprehensive and deep representations of the different viewpoints

Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse

The goal of argumentation mining, an evolving research field in computational linguistics, is to design methods capable of analyzing people's argumentation. In this article, we go beyond the state of the art in several ways. (i) We deal with actual Web data and take up the challenges given by the variety of registers, multiple domains, and unrestricted noisy user-generated Web discourse. (ii) We bridge the gap between normative argumentation theories and argumentation phenomena encountered in actual data by adapting an argumentation model tested in an extensive annotation study. (iii) We create a new gold standard corpus (90k tokens in 340 documents) and experiment with several machine learning methods to identify argument components. We offer the data, source codes, and annotation guidelines to the community under free licenses. Our findings show that argumentation mining in user-generated Web discourse is a feasible but challenging task.Comment: Cite as: Habernal, I. & Gurevych, I. (2017). Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse. Computational Linguistics 43(1), pp. 125-17

Practice-oriented controversies and borrowed epistemic credibility in current evolutionary biology: phylogeography as a case study

Although there is increasing recognition that theory and practice in science are intimately intertwined, philosophy of science perspectives on scientific controversies have been historically focused on theory rather than practice. As a step in the construction of frameworks for understanding controversies linked to scientific practices, here we introduce the notion of borrowed epistemic credibility (BEC), to describe the situation in which scientists, in order to garner support for their own stances, exploit similarities between tenets in their own field and accepted statements or positions properly developed within other areas of expertise. We illustrate the scope of application of our proposal with the analysis of a heavily methods-grounded, recent controversy in phylogeography, a biological subdiscipline concerned with the study of the historical causes of biogeographical variation through population genetics- and phylogenetics-based computer analyses of diversity in DNA sequences, both within species and between closely related taxa. Toward this end, we briefly summarize the arguments proposed by selected authors representing each side of the controversy: the ‘nested clade analysis’ school versus the ‘statistical phylogeography’ orientation. We claim that whereas both phylogeographic ‘research styles’ borrow epistemic credibility from sources such as formal logic, the familiarity of results from other scientific areas, the authority of prominent scientists, or the presumed superiority of quantitative vs. verbal reasoning, ‘theory’ plays essentially no role as a foundation of the controversy. Besides underscoring the importance of strictly methodological and other non-theoretical aspects of controversies in current evolutionary biology, our analysis suggests a perspective with potential usefulness for the re-examination of more general philosophy of biology issues, such as the nature of historical inference, rationality, justification, and objectivity

Normative EMG activation patterns of school-age children during gait

Gait analysis is widely used in clinics to study walking abnormalities for surgery planning, definition of rehabilitation protocols, and objective evaluation of clinical outcomes. Surface electromyography allows the study of muscle activity non-invasively and the evaluation of the timing of muscle activation during movement. The aim of this study was to present a normative dataset of muscle activation patterns obtained from a large number of strides in a population of 100 healthy children aged 6-11 years. The activity of Tibialis Anterior, Lateral head of Gastrocnemius, Vastus Medialis, Rectus Femoris and Lateral Hamstrings on both lower limbs was analyzed during a 2.5-min walk at free speed. More than 120 consecutive strides were analyzed for each child, resulting in approximately 28,000 strides. Onset and offset instants were reported for each observed muscle. The analysis of a high number of strides for each participant allowed us to obtain the most recurrent patterns of activation during gait, demonstrating that a subject uses a specific muscle with different activation modalities even in the same walk. The knowledge of the various activation patterns and of their statistics will be of help in clinical gait analysis and will serve as reference in the design of future gait studie

The Ebb and Flow of Controversial Debates on Social Media

We explore how the polarization around controversial topics evolves on Twitter - over a long period of time (2011 to 2016), and also as a response to major external events that lead to increased related activity. We find that increased activity is typically associated with increased polarization; however, we find no consistent long-term trend in polarization over time among the topics we study.Comment: Accepted as a short paper at ICWSM 2017. Please cite the ICWSM version and not the ArXiv versio

Controversy Analysis and Detection

Seeking information on a controversial topic is often a complex task. Alerting users about controversial search results can encourage critical literacy, promote healthy civic discourse and counteract the filter bubble effect, and therefore would be a useful feature in a search engine or browser extension. Additionally, presenting information to the user about the different stances or sides of the debate can help her navigate the landscape of search results beyond a simple list of 10 links . This thesis has made strides in the emerging niche of controversy detection and analysis. The body of work in this thesis revolves around two themes: computational models of controversy, and controversies occurring in neighborhoods of topics. Our broad contributions are: (1) Presenting a theoretical framework for modeling controversy as contention among populations; (2) Constructing the first automated approach to detecting controversy on the web, using a KNN classifier that maps from the web to similar Wikipedia articles; and (3) Proposing a novel controversy detection in Wikipedia by employing a stacked model using a combination of link structure and similarity. We conclude this work by discussing the challenging technical, societal and ethical implications of this emerging research area and proposing avenues for future work

Adaptationism, Deflationism, and Anti-Individualism

An examination of the externalist theories of Tyler Burge, Daniel Dennett and Ruth Millikan