Contextualizing Argument Quality Assessment with Relevant Knowledge
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Automatic assessment of the quality of arguments has been recognized as a challenging task with significant implications for misinformation and targeted speech. While real-world arguments are tightly anchored in context, existing computational methods analyze their quality in isolation, which affects their accuracy and generalizability. We propose SPARK: a novel method for scoring argument quality based on contextualization via relevant knowledge. We devise four augmentations that leverage large language models to provide feedback, infer hidden assumptions, supply a similar-quality argument, or give a counter-argument. SPARK uses a dual-encoder Transformer architecture to enable the original argument and its augmentation to be considered jointly. Our experiments in both in-domain and zero-shot setups show that SPARK consistently outperforms existing techniques across multiple metrics.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 May 2023.
Builds on
17 of 47 references.
References · 17
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2015Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Networkcited by 10,324
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,824
- 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 3,024
- 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,811
- 2019A Large-scale Dataset for Argument Quality Ranking: Construction and Analysiscited by 67
- 2019Automatic Argument Quality Assessment -- New Datasets and Methodscited by 47
- 2018End-to-End Retrieval in Continuous Spacecited by 46
- 2020AMPERSAND: Argument Mining for PERSuAsive oNline Discussionscited by 39
- 2019Exploring the Role of Prior Beliefs for Argument Persuasioncited by 31
- 2020Rhetoric, Logic, and Dialectic: Advancing Theory-based Argument Quality Assessment in Natural Language Processingcited by 17
5 more
- 2021Scientia Potentia Est -- On the Role of Knowledge in Computational Argumentationcited by 17
- 2021Learning From Revisions: Quality Assessment of Claims in Argumentation at Scalecited by 14
- 2021Automated Essay Scoring Using Transformer Modelscited by 14
- 2021Assessing the Sufficiency of Arguments through Conclusion Generationcited by 11
- 2022Towards a Holistic View on Argument Quality Predictioncited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.
4 papers.
- 2025TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localizationcited by 104
- 2025Leveraging Small LLMs for Argument Mining in Education: Argument Component Identification, Classification, and Assessmentcited by 4
- 2026ArgBench: Benchmarking LLMs on Computational Argumentation Taskscited by 1
- 2026Argument Quality Assessment with Large Language Models: A Pairwise Bradley-Terry Approachcited by 0
- 2026Argument Quality Assessment with Large Language Models: A Pairwise Bradley-Terry Approach27 May 2026
- 2026ArgBench: Benchmarking LLMs on Computational Argumentation Tasks19 Apr 2026
- 2025TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localization13 May 2025
- 2025Leveraging Small LLMs for Argument Mining in Education: Argument Component Identification, Classification, and Assessment20 Feb 2025