mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Flee the Flaw: Annotating the Underlying Logic of Fallacious Arguments Through Templates and Slot-filling

arXiv 2406.12402 ↗First posted 18 Jun 2024cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Prior research in computational argumentation has mainly focused on scoring the quality of arguments, with less attention on explicating logical errors. In this work, we introduce four sets of explainable templates for common informal logical fallacies designed to explicate a fallacy's implicit logic. Using our templates, we conduct an annotation study on top of 400 fallacious arguments taken from LOGIC dataset and achieve a high agreement score (Krippendorf's alpha of 0.54) and reasonable coverage (0.83). Finally, we conduct an experiment for detecting the structure of fallacies and discover that state-of-the-art language models struggle with detecting fallacy templates (0.47 accuracy). To facilitate research on fallacies, we make our dataset and guidelines publicly available.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2024.

Builds on

5 of 33 references.

References · 5

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  2. 2016Parsing Argumentation Structures in Persuasive Essayscited by 101
  3. 2017Argotario: Computational Argumentation Meets Serious Gamescited by 30
  4. 2023Multitask Instruction-based Prompting for Fallacy Recognitioncited by 23
  5. 2022Robust and Explainable Identification of Logical Fallacies in Natural Language Argumentscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.