Contextual Argument Component Classification for Class Discussions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Argument mining systems often consider contextual information, i.e. information outside of an argumentative discourse unit, when trained to accomplish tasks such as argument component identification, classification, and relation extraction. However, prior work has not carefully analyzed the utility of different contextual properties in context-aware models. In this work, we show how two different types of contextual information, local discourse context and speaker context, can be incorporated into a computational model for classifying argument components in multi-party classroom discussions. We find that both context types can improve performance, although the improvements are dependent on context size and position.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Feb 2021.
Builds on
9 of 19 references.
References · 9
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2015Effective Approaches to Attention-based Neural Machine Translationcited by 1,024
- 2016Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discoursecited by 69
- 2017Neural End-to-End Learning for Computational Argumentation Miningcited by 41
- 2020AMPERSAND: Argument Mining for PERSuAsive oNline Discussionscited by 39
- 2019Dissecting Content and Context in Argumentative Relation Analysiscited by 10
- 2019Argument Component Classification for Classroom Discussionscited by 5
- 2020The Discussion Tracker Corpus of Collaborative Argumentationcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
3 papers.