*********************************************************************************************
2nd Workshop on Argumentation Mining
Co-located with NAACL 2015, Denver, CO USA
June 4, 2015
Submission deadline: March 8, 2015
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/cardie/naacl-2nd-arg-mining/
*********************************************************************************************
The goal of this workshop is to provide a follow-on forum to last year's very successful Argumentation Mining workshop at ACL, the first research forum devoted to argumentation mining in all domains of discourse.
Argumentation mining is a relatively new challenge in corpus-based discourse analysis that involves automatically identifying argumentative structures within a document, e.g., the premises, conclusion, and argumentation scheme of each argument, as well as argument-subargument and argument-counterargument relationships between pairs of arguments in the document. To date, researchers have investigated methods for argumentation mining of legal documents (Mochales and Moens 2011; Bach et al. 2013; Ashley and Walker 2013; Wyner et al. 2010), on-line debates (Cabrio and Villata 2012), product reviews (Villalba and Saint-Dizier 2012; Wyner et al. 2012), user comments on proposed regulations (Park and Cardie 2014), newspaper articles and court cases (Feng and Hirst 2011). A related older strand of research (that uses the term ‘argumentative structure’ in a related but different sense than ours) has investigated automatically classifying the sentences of a scientific article's abstract or full text in terms of their contribution of new knowledge to a field (e.g., Liakata et al. 2012, Teufel 2010, Mizuta et al. 2005). In addition, argumentation mining has ties to sentiment analysis (e.g., Somasundaran and Wiebe 2010). To date there are few corpora with annotations for argumentation mining research (Reed et al. 2008) although corpora with annotations for argument sub-components have recently become available (e.g., Park and Cardie 2014).
Proposed applications of argumentation mining include improving information retrieval and information extraction as well as end-user visualization and summarization of arguments. Textual sources of interest include not only the formal writing of legal text, but also a variety of informal genres such as microtext, spoken meeting transcripts, product reviews and user comments. In instructional contexts where argumentation is a pedagogically important tool for conveying and assessing students’ command of course material, the written and diagrammed arguments of students (and the mappings between them) are educational data that can be mined for purposes of assessment and instruction (see e.g., Ong, Litman and Brusilovsky 2014). This is especially important given the wide-spread adoption of computer-supported peer review, computerized essay grading, and large-scale online courses and MOOCs.
Success in argumentation mining will require interdisciplinary approaches informed by natural language processing technology, theories of semantics, pragmatics and discourse, knowledge of discourse of domains such as law and science, artificial intelligence, argumentation theory, and computational models of argumentation. In addition, it will require the creation and annotation of high-quality corpora of argumentation from different types of sources in different domains.
This workshop will solicit full papers and short papers for oral and poster presentations as well as demos of argument/argumentation mining systems and tools.
Specific topics for submissions include:
- Automatic identification of argument elements (e.g., premises and conclusion; data, claim and warrant), argumentation schemes, relationships between arguments in a document, and relationships to discourse goals (e.g. stages of a “critical discussion”) and/or rhetorical strategies;
- Creation/evaluation of argument annotation schemes, relationship of argument annotation to linguistic and discourse structure annotation schemes, (semi)automatic argument annotation methods and tools, and creation/annotation of high-quality shared argumentation corpora;
- Processing strategies integrating NLP methods and AI models developed for argumentation such as argumentation frameworks;
- Applications of argument/argumentation mining to, e.g., mining requirements and technical documents, analysis of arguments in dialogue (meetings, etc.), opinion analysis and mining consumer reviews, evaluation of students’ written arguments and argument diagrams, and information access (retrieval, extraction, summarization, and visualization) in scientific and legal documents;
- Argument mining and user generated content (UGC): automatic identification of argument elements in UGC, automatic identification and classification of relations between argument elements, relationships to discourse goals/rhetorical strategies in UGC, manually annotated and applications related to argument mining in UGC.
- Descriptions of implemented systems and tools for argument/argumentation mining;
- Descriptions and proposals for shared tasks;
- Student research proposals.
Submission Information
We will be using the NAACL 2015 Submission Guidelines for all submissions. Authors are invited to submit a full paper of up to 9 pages of content with up to 2 additional pages for references. We also invite short papers of up to 5 pages of content, including 2 additional pages for references. (Depending on the number and type of submissions, some long papers might be accepted as short papers.)
Papers that describe systems or tools are also invited to give a demo of their system. If you would like to present a demo in addition to presenting the paper, please make sure to select either
"full paper + demo" or "short paper + demo" under "Submission Category" in the START submission page.
Previously published papers cannot be accepted. The submissions will be reviewed by the program committee. As reviewing will be blind, please ensure that papers are anonymous. Self-references that reveal the author's identity,
e.g., "We previously showed (Smith, 1991) ...", should be avoided. Instead,
use citations such as "Smith previously showed (Smith, 1991) ...".
Please use the 2015 NAACL style sheets for composing your paper: http://naacl.org/naacl-pubs/ .
We will be using the START conference system to manage submissions (link forthcoming).
Important Dates
- Submission Deadline: March 08 - 23:59 EST (New York City Time) [ Current EST ]
- Notification of Acceptance: March 30
- Camera-ready Papers Due: April 08 (*just 1 week*)
- Workshop: June 04
Program Committee
- Stergos Afantenos, IRIT Toulouse – France
- Kevin Ashley, University of Pittsburgh – USA
- Floris Bex, University of Groningen - The Netherlands
- Elena Cabrio, INRIA Sophia-Antipolis Méditerranée -France
- Claire Cardie, Cornell University – USA
- Massimiliano Giacomin, University of Brescia – Italy
- Matthias Grabmair, University of Pittsburgh - USA
- Floriana Grasso, University of Liverpool - UK
- Nancy Green, University of N.C. Greensboro – USA
- Iryna Gurevych, Universität Darmstadt – Germany
- Ivan Habernal, DIPF institute Frankfurt – Germany
- Graeme Hirst, University of Toronto – Canada
- Vangelis Karkaletsis, National Centre for Scientific Research (N.C.S.R.) - Greece
- Valia Kordoni, Humboldt Universitaet zu Berlin - Germany
- Joao Leite, FCT-UNL - Universidade Nova de Lisboa – Portugal
- Beishui Liao, Zhejiang University – China
- Maria Liakata, University of Warwick - UK
- Diane Litman, University of Pittsburgh – USA
- Bernardo Magnini, FBK Trento – Italy
- Robert Mercer, University of Western Ontario – Canada
- Marie-Francine Moens, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven – Belgium
- Smaranda Muresan, Columbia University – USA
- Fabio Paglieri, CNR – Italy
- Alexis Palmer, Saarland University – Germany
- Joonsuk Park, Cornell University – USA
- Simon Parsons, University of Liverpool – UK
- Carolyn Rosé, Carnegie Mellon University – USA
- Georgios Petasis, N.C.S.R. "Demokritos" – Greece
- Craig Pfeifer, MITRE – USA
- Chris Reed, University of Dundee – UK
- Ariel Rosenfeld, Bar-Ilan University – Israel
- Patrick Saint-Dizier, Institut de Recherches en Informatique de Toulouse – France
- Christian Schunn, University Pittsburgh – USA
- Jodi Schneider, INRIA Sophia-Antipolis Méditerranée – France
- Noam Slonim, IBM – Israel
- Steffen Staab, University of Koblenz – Germany
- Manfred Stede, Universitat Potsdam – Germany
- Simone Teufel, University of Cambridge – UK
- Marilyn Walker, University of California Santa Cruz – USA
- Vern Walker, Hofstra University – USA
- Janyce Wiebe, University of Pittsburgh – USA
- Serena Villata, INRIA Sophia-Antipolis Méditerranée – France
- Lu Wang, Cornell University - USA
- Adam Wyner, University Aberdeen – UK