Abstract

We introduce a scalable Bayesian preference learning method for identifying convincing arguments in the absence of gold-standard ratings or rankings. In contrast to previous work, we avoid the need for separate methods to perform quality control on training data, predict rankings and perform pairwise classification. Bayesian approaches are an effective solution when faced with sparse or noisy training data, but have not previously been used to identify convincing arguments. One issue is scalability, which we address by developing a stochastic variational inference method for Gaussian process (GP) preference learning. We show how our method can be applied to predict argument convincingness from crowdsourced data, outperforming the previous state-of-the-art, particularly when trained with small amounts of unreliable data. We demonstrate how the Bayesian approach enables more effective active learning, thereby reducing the amount of data required to identify convincing arguments for new users and domains. While word embeddings are principally used with neural networks, our results show that word embeddings in combination with linguistic features also benefit GPs when predicting argument convincingness.

Highlights

  • Arguments are intended to persuade the audience of a particular point of view and are an important way for humans to reason about controversial topics (Mercier and Sperber, 2011)

  • We presented a novel Bayesian approach to predicting argument convincingness from pairwise labels using Gaussian process preference learning (GPPL)

  • Using recent advances in approximate inference, we developed a scalable algorithm for GPPL that is suitable for large NLP datasets

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Arguments are intended to persuade the audience of a particular point of view and are an important way for humans to reason about controversial topics (Mercier and Sperber, 2011). The amount of argumentative text on any chosen subject can, how-. Topic: “William Farquhar ought to be honoured as the rightful founder of Singapore”. Stance: “No, it is Raffles!” Argument 1: HE HAS A BOSS(RAFFLES) HE HAS TO FOLLOW HIM AND NOT GO ABOUT DOING ANYTHING ELSE. Argument 2: Raffles conceived a town plan to remodel Singapore into a modern city. The plan consisted of separate areas for different. Crowdsourced labels: {2 1, 1 2, 2 1}

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call