iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9443-0_12
Utilizing Argument Mining Techniques for Argumentative Dialogue Systems | SpringerLink
Skip to main content

Utilizing Argument Mining Techniques for Argumentative Dialogue Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
9th International Workshop on Spoken Dialogue System Technology

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering ((LNEE,volume 579))

Abstract

This work presents a pilot study for the application of argument mining techniques in the context of argumentative Dialogue Systems.  We extract the argument structure of an online debate and show how it can be utilized to generate artificial persuasive dialogues in an agent-agent scenario.  The interaction between the agents is formalized as argument game and the resulting artificial dialogues are evaluated in a user study by comparing them to human generated ones.  The outcomes indicate that the artificial dialogues are logically consistent and thus show that the use of the employed argument annotation scheme was successful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://idebate.org/debatabase (last accessed 16 March 2019).

  2. 2.

    Material reproduced from www.iedebate.org with the permission of the International Debating Education Association. Copyright ©2005 International Debate Education Association. All Rights Reserved.

  3. 3.

    Material reproduced from www.iedebate.org with the permission of the International Debating Education Association. Copyright ©2005 International Debate Education Association. All Rights Reserved.

  4. 4.

    https://marketplace.clickworker.com (last accessed 16 March 2019).

References

  1. Amgoud L, Parsons S (2001) Agent dialogues with conflicting preferences. In: ATAL, vol 1. Springer, pp 190–205

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bechhofer S (2009) Owl: web ontology language. In: Encyclopedia of database systems. Springer, pp 2008–2009

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bench-Capon TJ (1998) Specification and implementation of Toulmin dialogue game. In: Proceedings of JURIX, vol 98, pp 5–20

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bex F, Lawrence J, Snaith M, Reed C (2013) Implementing the argument web. Commun ACM 56(10):66–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Langhammer S (2017) A debating ontology for argumentative dialogue systems. Bachelor’s thesis, In: Institute of communication engineering. Ulm University

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lawrence J, Bex F, Reed C (2012) Dialogues on the argument web: mixed initiative argumentation with arvina. In: COMMA, pp 513–514

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lippi M, Torroni P (2016) Argumentation mining: state of the art and emerging trends. ACM Trans Internet Technol (TOIT) 16(2):10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Moens MF (2013) Argumentation mining: where are we now, where do we want to be and how do we get there?. In: Post-proceedings of the 4th and 5th workshops of the forum for information retrieval evaluation. ACM, p 2

    Google Scholar 

  9. Palau RM, Moens MF (2009) Argumentation mining: the detection, classification and structure of arguments in text. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on artificial intelligence and law. ACM, pp 98–107

    Google Scholar 

  10. Prakken H (2000) On dialogue systems with speech acts, arguments, and counterarguments. In: JELIA. Springer, pp 224–238

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Prakken H (2006) Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. knowl Eng Rev 21(2):163–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rach N, Minker W, Ultes S (2017) Towards an argumentative dialogue system. In: Bex F, Grasso F, Green N (eds) Proceedings of the 17th workshop on computational models of natural argument co-located with ICAIL 2017; 2017 Jul 16; London, UK, London: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 27–29 p

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rakshit G, Bowden KK, Reed L, Misra A, Walker M (2017) Debbie, the debate bot of the future. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.03167

  14. Reed C, Norman T (2003) Argumentation machines: new frontiers in argument and computation, vol. 9. Springer Science & Business Media

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenfeld A, Kraus S (2016) Strategical argumentative agent for human persuasion. In: ECAI, pp 320–328

    Google Scholar 

  16. Stab C, Daxenberger J, Stahlhut C, Miller T, Schiller B, Tauchmann C, Eger S, Gurevych I (2018) Argumentext: searching for arguments in heterogeneous sources. In: Proceedings of the 2018 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: demonstrations, pp 21–25

    Google Scholar 

  17. Stab C, Gurevych I (2014) Annotating argument components and relations in persuasive essays. In: COLING, pp 1501–1510

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stab C, Gurevych I (2014) Identifying argumentative discourse structures in persuasive essays. In: EMNLP, pp 46–56

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wells S, Reed CA (2012) A domain specific language for describing diverse systems of dialogue. J Appl Logic 10(4):309–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yuan T, Moore D, Grierson A (2008) A human-computer dialogue system for educational debate: a computational dialectics approach. Int J Artif Intell Educ 18(1):3–26

    Google Scholar 

  21. Yuan T, Moore D, Reed C, Ravenscroft A, Maudet N (2011) Informal logic dialogue games in human-computer dialogue. Knowl Eng Rev 26(2):159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work has been funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) within the project “How to Win Arguments—Empowering Virtual Agents to Improve their Persuasiveness”, Grant Number 376696351, as part of the Priority Program “Robust Argumentation Machines (RATIO)” (SPP-1999).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niklas Rach .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Rach, N., Langhammer, S., Minker, W., Ultes, S. (2019). Utilizing Argument Mining Techniques for Argumentative Dialogue Systems. In: D'Haro, L., Banchs, R., Li, H. (eds) 9th International Workshop on Spoken Dialogue System Technology. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 579. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9443-0_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics