Stance Classification on PTT Comments

With the development of social media and online forums, users have grown accustomed to expressing their agreement and disagreement via short texts. Elements that reveal the user’s stance or subjectivity thus becomes an important resource in identifying the user’s position on a given topic. In the current study, we observe comments of an online bulletin board in Taiwan for how people express their stance when responding to other people’s post in Chinese. A lexicon is built based on linguistic analysis and annotation of the data. We performed binary classification task using these linguistic features and was able to reach an average of 71 percent accuracy. A linguistic analysis on the confusion caused in the classification task is done for future work on better accuracy for such task.

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

Classification of the Stance in Online Debates Using the Dependency Relations Feature

Online discussion forums offer Internet users a medium for discussions about current political debates. The debate is a system of claims regarding interactivity and representation. Users make claims in an online discussion with superior content to support their position. Factual accuracy and emotional appeal are critical attributes used to convince readers. A key challenge in debate forums is to identify the participants’ stance, each of which is inter-dependent and inter-connected. This research work aims to construct a classifier that takes the linguistic features of the posts as input and outputs predictions for the stance label of each post. Three types of features which include Lexical, Dependency, and Morphology are used to detect the stance of the posts. Lexical features such as cue words are employed as surface features, and deep features include dependency and morphology features. Multinomial Naïve Bayes classifier is used to build a model for classifying stance and the Chi-Square method is used to select the good feature set. The performance of the stance classification system is evaluated in terms of accuracy. The result of stance labels for this proposed research represents as for and against by analyzing the surface and deep features that capture the content of a post

STANCY: Stance Classification Based on Consistency Cues

Controversial claims are abundant in online media and discussion forums. A better understanding of such claims requires analyzing them from different perspectives. Stance classification is a necessary step for inferring these perspectives in terms of supporting or opposing the claim. In this work, we present a neural network model for stance classification leveraging BERT representations and augmenting them with a novel consistency constraint. Experiments on the Perspectrum dataset, consisting of claims and users' perspectives from various debate websites, demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach over state-of-the-art baselines.Comment: Accepted at EMNLP 201

STANCY: Stance Classification Based on Consistency Cues

Controversial claims are abundant in online media and discussion forums. A better understanding of such claims requires analyzing them from different perspectives. Stance classification is a necessary step for inferring these perspectives in terms of supporting or opposing the claim. In this work, we present a neural network model for stance classification leveraging BERT representations and augmenting them with a novel consistency constraint. Experiments on the Perspectrum dataset, consisting of claims and users' perspectives from various debate websites, demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach over state-of-the-art baselines

Parsing Argumentation Structures in Persuasive Essays

In this article, we present a novel approach for parsing argumentation structures. We identify argument components using sequence labeling at the token level and apply a new joint model for detecting argumentation structures. The proposed model globally optimizes argument component types and argumentative relations using integer linear programming. We show that our model considerably improves the performance of base classifiers and significantly outperforms challenging heuristic baselines. Moreover, we introduce a novel corpus of persuasive essays annotated with argumentation structures. We show that our annotation scheme and annotation guidelines successfully guide human annotators to substantial agreement. This corpus and the annotation guidelines are freely available for ensuring reproducibility and to encourage future research in computational argumentation.Comment: Under review in Computational Linguistics. First submission: 26 October 2015. Revised submission: 15 July 201