Top

Published in:

2021 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Overview of Touché 2021: Argument Retrieval

Extended Abstract

Authors : Alexander Bondarenko, Lukas Gienapp, Maik Fröbe, Meriem Beloucif, Yamen Ajjour, Alexander Panchenko, Chris Biemann, Benno Stein, Henning Wachsmuth, Martin Potthast, Matthias Hagen

Published in: Advances in Information Retrieval

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Technologies for argument mining and argumentation analysis are maturing rapidly, so that, as a result, the retrieval of arguments in search scenarios becomes a feasible objective. For the second time, we organize the Touché lab on argument retrieval with two shared tasks: (1) argument retrieval for controversial questions, where arguments are to be retrieved from a focused debate portal-based collection and, (2) argument retrieval for comparative questions, where argumentative documents are to be retrieved from a generic web crawl. In this paper, we briefly summarize the results of Touché 2020, the first edition of the lab, and describe the planned setup for the second edition at CLEF 2021.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter Overview of PAN 2021: Authorship Verification, Profiling Hate Speech Spreaders on Twitter, and Style Change Detection

next chapter Text Simplification for Scientific Information Access

‘Touché’ is commonly “used to acknowledge a hit in fencing or the success or appropriateness of an argument, an accusation, or a witty point.” [https://merriam-webster.com/dictionary/touche].

Available for download on the lab website: https://touche.webis.de.

https://www.args.me/api-en.html.

https://lemurproject.org/clueweb12/.

https://www.chatnoir.eu/doc/api/.

https://demo.webis.de/targer-api/apidocs/.

https://trec.nist.gov/tracks.html.

https://github.com/castorini/anserini/.

https://trec.nist.gov/trec_eval/.

Ajjour, Y., Wachsmuth, H., Kiesel, J., Potthast, M., Hagen, M., Stein, B.: Data acquisition for argument search: the args.me corpus. In: Benzmüller, C., Stuckenschmidt, H. (eds.) KI 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11793, pp. 48–59. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30179-8_4CrossRef

Bevendorff, J., Stein, B., Hagen, M., Potthast, M.: Elastic ChatNoir: search engine for the ClueWeb and the common crawl. In: Pasi, G., Piwowarski, B., Azzopardi, L., Hanbury, A. (eds.) ECIR 2018. LNCS, vol. 10772, pp. 820–824. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76941-7_83CrossRef

Bondarenko, A., et al.: Overview of Touché 2020: argument retrieval. In: Arampatzis, A., et al. (eds.) CLEF 2020. LNCS, vol. 12260, pp. 384–395. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58219-7_26CrossRef

Braunstain, L., Kurland, O., Carmel, D., Szpektor, I., Shtok, A.: Supporting human answers for advice-seeking questions in CQA sites. In: Ferro, N., et al. (eds.) ECIR 2016. LNCS, vol. 9626, pp. 129–141. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30671-1_10CrossRef

Chernodub, A., et al.: TARGER: neural argument mining at your fingertips. In: Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL 2019 (demos), pp. 195–200, Association for Computational Linguistics (2019). URL https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/p19-3031

Gienapp, L., Stein, B., Hagen, M., Potthast, M.: Efficient pairwise annotation of argument quality. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL 2020, pp. 5772–5781. Association for Computational Linguistics (2020). https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.acl-main.511/

Gretz, S., et al.: A large-scale dataset for argument quality ranking: construction and analysis. In: Proceedings of The Thirty-Fourth Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2020, The Thirty-Second Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, IAAI 2020, The Tenth Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, EAAI 2020, pp. 7805–7813. AAAI Press (2020). https://aaai.org/ojs/index.php/AAAI/article/view/6285

Järvelin, K., Kekäläinen, J.: Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 20(4), 422–446 (2002). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/582415.582418

Potthast, M., et al.: Argument search: assessing argument relevance. In: Proceedings of the 42nd International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR 2019, pp. 1117–1120. ACM (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3331184.3331327

10.

Potthast, M., Gollub, T., Wiegmann, M., Stein, B.: TIRA integrated research architecture. Information Retrieval Evaluation in a Changing World. TIRS, vol. 41, pp. 123–160. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22948-1_5CrossRef

11.

Rafalak, M., Abramczuk, K., Wierzbicki, A.: Incredible: is (almost) all web content trustworthy? Analysis of psychological factors related to website credibility evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International World Wide Web Conference, WWW 2014, Companion Volume, pp. 1117–1122. ACM (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2567948.2578997

12.

Robertson, S.E., Zaragoza, H., Taylor, M.J.: Simple BM25 extension to multiple weighted fields. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM 2004, pp. 42–49. ACM (2004). https://doi.org/10.1145/1031171.1031181

13.

Schildwächter, M., Bondarenko, A., Zenker, J., Hagen, M., Biemann, C., Panchenko, A.: Answering comparative questions: better than ten-blue-links? In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval, CHIIR 2019, pp. 361–365. ACM (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3295750.3298916

14.

Stab, C., et al.: ArgumenText: searching for arguments in heterogeneous sources. In: Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, NAACL 2018, pp. 21–25. Association for Computational Linguistics (2018). https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/N18-5005

15.

Toledo, A., et al.: Automatic argument quality assessment - new datasets and methods. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, EMNLP-IJCNLP 2019, pp. 5624–5634. Association for Computational Linguistics (2019). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-1564

16.

Wachsmuth, H., et al.: Computational argumentation quality assessment in natural language. In: Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL), pp. 176–187. Association for Computational Linguistics (2017). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/e17-1017

17.

Wachsmuth, H., et al.: Building an argument search engine for the web. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Argument Mining, ArgMining 2017, pp. 49–59. Association for Computational Linguistics (2017). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w17-5106

18.

Yang, P., Fang, H., Lin, J.: Anserini: enabling the use of lucene for information retrieval research. In: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR 2017, pp. 1253–1256. ACM (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3077136.3080721

19.

Zhai, C., Lafferty, J.D.: A study of smoothing methods for language models applied to ad hoc information retrieval. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR 2001, pp. 334–342. ACM (2001). https://doi.org/10.1145/383952.384019

Title: Overview of Touché 2021: Argument Retrieval
Authors: Alexander Bondarenko
Lukas Gienapp
Maik Fröbe
Meriem Beloucif
Yamen Ajjour
Alexander Panchenko
Chris Biemann
Benno Stein
Henning Wachsmuth
Martin Potthast
Matthias Hagen
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: Advances in Information Retrieval
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-72239-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-72240-1

Copyright Year: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72240-1_67

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"