Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Livro |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://hdl.handle.net/10216/145167 |
Resumo: | Interest in argument mining has resulted in an increasing number of argument annotated corpora. However, most focus on English texts with explicit argumentative discourse markers, such as persuasive essays or legal documents. Conversely, we report on the first extensive and consolidated Portuguese argument annotation project focused on opinion articles. We briefly describe the annotation guidelines based on a multi-layered process and analyze the manual annotations produced, highlighting the main challenges of this textual genre. We then conduct a comprehensive inter-annotator agreement analysis, including argumentative discourse units, their classes and relations, and resulting graphs. This analysis reveals that each of these aspects tackles very different kinds of challenges. We observe differences in annotator profiles, motivating our aim of producing a non-aggregated corpus containing the insights of every annotator. We note that the interpretation and identification of token-level arguments is challenging; nevertheless, tasks that focus on higher-level components of the argument structure can obtain considerable agreement. We lay down perspectives on corpus usage, exploiting its multi-faceted nature. |
id |
RCAP_759f2dd175e9aa10abc31f4ab7f0387d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio-aberto.up.pt:10216/145167 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articlesInterest in argument mining has resulted in an increasing number of argument annotated corpora. However, most focus on English texts with explicit argumentative discourse markers, such as persuasive essays or legal documents. Conversely, we report on the first extensive and consolidated Portuguese argument annotation project focused on opinion articles. We briefly describe the annotation guidelines based on a multi-layered process and analyze the manual annotations produced, highlighting the main challenges of this textual genre. We then conduct a comprehensive inter-annotator agreement analysis, including argumentative discourse units, their classes and relations, and resulting graphs. This analysis reveals that each of these aspects tackles very different kinds of challenges. We observe differences in annotator profiles, motivating our aim of producing a non-aggregated corpus containing the insights of every annotator. We note that the interpretation and identification of token-level arguments is challenging; nevertheless, tasks that focus on higher-level components of the argument structure can obtain considerable agreement. We lay down perspectives on corpus usage, exploiting its multi-faceted nature.20222022-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/bookapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/10216/145167engRocha, GilTrigo, LuísCardoso, Henrique LopesSousa-Silva, RuiCarvalho, PaulaMartins, BrunoWon, Miguelinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-29T15:37:16Zoai:repositorio-aberto.up.pt:10216/145167Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T00:27:58.486487Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
title |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
spellingShingle |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles Rocha, Gil |
title_short |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
title_full |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
title_fullStr |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
title_full_unstemmed |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
title_sort |
Annotating arguments in a corpus of opinion articles |
author |
Rocha, Gil |
author_facet |
Rocha, Gil Trigo, Luís Cardoso, Henrique Lopes Sousa-Silva, Rui Carvalho, Paula Martins, Bruno Won, Miguel |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Trigo, Luís Cardoso, Henrique Lopes Sousa-Silva, Rui Carvalho, Paula Martins, Bruno Won, Miguel |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Rocha, Gil Trigo, Luís Cardoso, Henrique Lopes Sousa-Silva, Rui Carvalho, Paula Martins, Bruno Won, Miguel |
description |
Interest in argument mining has resulted in an increasing number of argument annotated corpora. However, most focus on English texts with explicit argumentative discourse markers, such as persuasive essays or legal documents. Conversely, we report on the first extensive and consolidated Portuguese argument annotation project focused on opinion articles. We briefly describe the annotation guidelines based on a multi-layered process and analyze the manual annotations produced, highlighting the main challenges of this textual genre. We then conduct a comprehensive inter-annotator agreement analysis, including argumentative discourse units, their classes and relations, and resulting graphs. This analysis reveals that each of these aspects tackles very different kinds of challenges. We observe differences in annotator profiles, motivating our aim of producing a non-aggregated corpus containing the insights of every annotator. We note that the interpretation and identification of token-level arguments is challenging; nevertheless, tasks that focus on higher-level components of the argument structure can obtain considerable agreement. We lay down perspectives on corpus usage, exploiting its multi-faceted nature. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/book |
format |
book |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://hdl.handle.net/10216/145167 |
url |
https://hdl.handle.net/10216/145167 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799136191935676416 |