Proceedings ICPW'07: 2nd International Conference on the Pragmatic Web, 22-23 Oct. 2007, Tilburg: NL

Proceedings ICPW'07: 2nd International Conference on the Pragmatic Web, 22-23 Oct. 2007, Tilburg: N

Argumentation models and their use in corpus annotation: practice, prospects, and challenges

The study of argumentation is transversal to several research domains, from philosophy to linguistics, from the law to computer science and artificial intelligence. In discourse analysis, several distinct models have been proposed to harness argumentation, each with a different focus or aim. To analyze the use of argumentation in natural language, several corpora annotation efforts have been carried out, with a more or less explicit grounding on one of such theoretical argumentation models. In fact, given the recent growing interest in argument mining applications, argument-annotated corpora are crucial to train machine learning models in a supervised way. However, the proliferation of such corpora has led to a wide disparity in the granularity of the argument annotations employed. In this paper, we review the most relevant theoretical argumentation models, after which we survey argument annotation projects closely following those theoretical models. We also highlight the main simplifications that are often introduced in practice. Furthermore, we glimpse other annotation efforts that are not so theoretically grounded but instead follow a shallower approach. It turns out that most argument annotation projects make their own assumptions and simplifications, both in terms of the textual genre they focus on and in terms of adapting the adopted theoretical argumentation model for their own agenda. Issues of compatibility among argument-annotated corpora are discussed by looking at the problem from a syntactical, semantic, and practical perspective. Finally, we discuss current and prospective applications of models that take advantage of argument-annotated corpora

Chapter 4 The epistemic status of scientific visualisations

As the considerations in the previous chapter made clear, visual representations are, without doubt, part of many epistemic processes in contemporary science. Scientists present diagrams in their publications and talks to communicate their research results. They investigate computer-generated images as substitutes for research objects. Drawings in textbooks are used to educate novices, to introduce them to a new field of knowledge and so on. Moreover, it was pointed out that in quite a few instances images might also be used for non-epistemic purposes, for example to gain the attention of a particular audienc

Workshop Notes of the Seventh International Workshop "What can FCA do for Artificial Intelligence?"

International audienceThese are the proceedings of the seventh edition of the FCA4AI workshop (http://www.fca4ai.hse.ru/) co-located with the IJCAI 2019 Conference in Macao (China). Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) is a mathematically well-founded theory aimed at classification and knowledge discovery that can be used for many purposes in Artificial Intelligence (AI). The objective of the FCA4AI workshop is to investigate two main issues: how can FCA supports various AI activities (knowledge discovery, knowledge engineering, machine learning, data mining, information retrieval, recommendation. . . ), and how can FCA be extended in order to help AI researchers to solve new and complex problems in their domain

Inferring Inferences: Relational Propositions for Argument Mining

Inferential reasoning is an essential feature of argumentation. Therefore, a method for mining discourse for inferential structures would be of value for argument analysis and assessment. The logic of relational propositions is a procedure for rendering texts as expressions in propositional logic directly from their rhetorical structures. From rhetorical structures, relational propositions are defined, and from these propositions, logical expressions are then generated. There are, however, unsettled issues associated with Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST), some of which are problematic for inference mining. This paper takes a deep dive into some of these issues, with the aim of elucidating the problems and providing guidance for how they may be resolved

Chapter 4 The epistemic status of scientific visualisations

As the considerations in the previous chapter made clear, visual representations are, without doubt, part of many epistemic processes in contemporary science. Scientists present diagrams in their publications and talks to communicate their research results. They investigate computer-generated images as substitutes for research objects. Drawings in textbooks are used to educate novices, to introduce them to a new field of knowledge and so on. Moreover, it was pointed out that in quite a few instances images might also be used for non-epistemic purposes, for example to gain the attention of a particular audienc

What Do We Know About the World? Rhetorical and Argumentative Perspectives

his book consists of selected papers delivered at “First International Conference on Rhetoric in Croatia: the Days of Ivo Škarić” in May, 2012, and subsequently revised for publication. Through a variety of different routes, the papers explore the role of rhetoric and argumentation in various types of public discourse and present interdisciplinary work connecting linguists, phoneticians, philosophers, law experts and communication scientists in the common ground of rhetoric and argumentation

Debating Technology for Dialogical Argument:Sensemaking, Engagement and Analytics

Debating technologies, a newly emerging strand of research into computational technologies to support human debating, offer a powerful way of providing naturalistic, dialogue-based interaction with complex information spaces. The full potential of debating technologies for dialogical argument can, however, only be realized once key technical and engineering challenges are overcome, namely data structure, data availability, and interoperability between components. Our aim in this article is to show that the Argument Web, a vision for integrated, reusable, semantically rich resources connecting views, opinions, arguments, and debates online, offers a solution to these challenges. Through the use of a running example taken from the domain of citizen dialogue, we demonstrate for the first time that different Argument Web components focusing on sensemaking, engagement, and analytics can work in concert as a suite of debating technologies for rich, complex, dialogical argument