# End-to-End Argument Mining over Varying Rhetorical Structures

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.11218 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.11218/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 20 Jan 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.04672/) (2022)
- [DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09543/) (2021)
- [AllenNLP: A Deep Semantic Natural Language Processing Platform](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.07640/) (2018)
- [Deep Biaffine Attention for Neural Dependency Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.01734/) (2016)
- [DMRST: A Joint Framework for Document-Level Multilingual RST Discourse Segmentation and Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.04518/) (2021)
- [Why Can't Discourse Parsing Generalize? A Thorough Investigation of the Impact of Data Diversity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.06488/) (2023)
- [The Change that Matters in Discourse Parsing: Estimating the Impact of Domain Shift on Parser Error](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11317/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Disco-RAG: Discourse-Aware Retrieval-Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04377/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Rhetorical Structure Theory implies no single discourse interpretation of a text, and the limitations of RST parsers further exacerbate inconsistent parsing of similar structures. Therefore, it is important to take into account that the same argumentative structure can be found in semantically similar texts with varying rhetorical structures. In this work, the differences between paraphrases within the same argument scheme are evaluated from a rhetorical perspective. The study proposes a deep dependency parsing model to assess the connection between rhetorical and argument structures. The model utilizes rhetorical relations; RST structures of paraphrases serve as training data augmentations. The method allows for end-to-end argumentation analysis using a rhetorical tree instead of a word sequence. It is evaluated on the bilingual Microtexts corpus, and the first results on fully-fledged argument parsing for the Russian version of the corpus are reported. The results suggest that argument mining can benefit from multiple variants of discourse structure.