Bibliography

  1. [ADE 10] ÄDEL A., “Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English”, Nordic Journal of English Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 69–97, 2010.
  2. [ACH 08] ACHANANUPARP P., HU X., SHEN X., “The evaluation of sentence similarity measures”, International Conference on Data Warehousing and Knowledge Discovery, Springer, Gothenburg, Sweden, pp. 305–316, 2008.
  3. [AHA 14] AHARONI E., POLNAROV A., LAVEE T. et al., “A benchmark dataset for automatic detection of claims and evidence in the context of controversial topics”, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argumentation Mining, Baltimore, MD, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 64–68, 2014.
  4. [ALK 16] AL-KHATIB K., WACHSMUTH H., KIESEL J. et al., “A news editorial corpus for mining argumentation strategies”, Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 16), Osaka, Japan, pp. 3433–3443, December 2016.
  5. [ALL 07] ALLWOOD J., CERRATO L., JOKINEN K. et al., “The MUMIN coding scheme for the annotation of feedback, turn management and sequencing phenomena”, Language Resources and Evaluation, vol. 41, nos 3–4, pp. 273–287, 2007.
  6. [AMO 10] AMOSSY R., L’argumentation dans le discours, Armand Colin, Paris, France, 2010.
  7. [AND 10] ANDROUTSOPOULOS I., MALAKASIOTIS P., “A survey of paraphrasing and textual entailment methods”, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 38, pp. 135–187, 2010.
  8. [ANS 83] ANSCOMBRE J.C., DUCROT O., L’argumentation dans la langue, Mardaga, Brussels, Belgium, 1983.
  9. [ART 08] ARTSTEIN R., POESIO M., “Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics”, Computational Linguistics, vol. 34, no. 4, 2008.
  10. [AUS 62] AUSTIN J.L., How to Do Things with Words, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 152, 1962.
  11. [AZA 99] AZAR M., “Argumentative text as rhetorical structure: An application of rhetorical structure theory”, Argumentation, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 97–114, 1999.
  12. [BAR 16] BARKER E., GAIZAUSKAS R., “Summarizing multi-party argumentative conversations in reader comment on news”, Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Argument Mining, Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin, Germany, pp. 12–20, 2016.
  13. [BEX 12] BEX F., GORDON T., LAWRENCE J. et al., “Interchanging arguments between Carneades and AIF”, Computational Models of Argument (COMMA), vol. 245, pp. 390–397, 2012.
  14. [BIR 11] BIRAN O., RAMBOW O., “Identifying justifications in written dialogs by classifying text as argumentative”, International Journal of Semantic Computing, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 363–381, 2011.
  15. [BLA 07] BLAIR-GOLDENSOHN S., MCKEOWN K., RAMBOW O., “Building and refining rhetorical-semantic relation models”, Human Language Technologies 2007: The Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics; Proceedings of the Main Conference, Rochester, NY, pp. 428–435, April 2007.
  16. [BOJ 01] BOJARCZUKA C.C., LOPESB H.S., FREITASC A.A., “Data mining with constrained-syntax genetic programming: Applications in medical data set”, Algorithms, vol. 6, p. 7, 2001.
  17. [BOL 14] BOLTUI F., NAJDER J., “Back up your stance: recognizing arguments in online discussions”, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argumentation Mining, Association for Computational Linguistics, Baltimore, MD, pp. 49–58, 2014.
  18. [BUD 11] BUDZYNSKA K., REED C., Whence Inference, Report, University of Dundee, Scotland, 2011.
  19. [BUD 14a] BUDZYNSKA K., JANIER M., KANG J. et al., “Towards argument mining from dialogue”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2014, in Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 266, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 185–196, 2014.
  20. [BUD 14b] BUDZYNSKA K., JANIER M., REED C. et al., “A model for processing illocutionary structures and argumentation in debates”, Proceedings of LREC14, Reykjavik, Iceland, 2014.
  21. [BUD 14c] BUDZYNSKA K., ROCCI A., YASKORSKA O., “Financial dialogue games: A protocol for earnings conference calls”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2014, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 266, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 19–30, 2014.
  22. [BUD 16] BUDZYNSKA K., JANIER M., REED C. et al., “Theoretical foundations for illocutionary structure parsing”, Argument & Computation, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 91–108, 2016.
  23. [BUD 18] BUDZYNSKA K., PEREIRA-FARINA M., DE FRANCO D. et al., “Time-constrained multi-layer corpus creation”, 16th ArgDiap Conference Book of Abstracts, Warsaw, Poland, pp. 31–36, 2018.
  24. [CAB 12] CABRIO E., VILLATA S., “Combining textual entailment and argumentation theory for supporting online debates interactions”, Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Short Papers - Volume 2, ACL ’12, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, pp. 208–212, 2012.
  25. [CAB 13] CABRIO E., VILLATA S., “A natural language bipolar argumentation approach to support users in online debate interactions”, Argument and Computation, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 209–230, 2013.
  26. [CAR 03] CARLSON L., MARCU D., OKUROWSKI M.E., “Building a discourse-tagged corpus in the framework of rhetorical structure theory”, Current and New Directions in Discourse and Dialogue, Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 85–112, 2003.
  27. [CHA 06] CHANG D.-S., CHOI K.-S., “Incremental cue phrase learning and bootstrapping method for causality extraction using cue phrase and word pair probabilities”, Information Processing & Management, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 662–678, 2006.
  28. [CHE 06] CHESVEÑAR C., MCGINNIS J., MODGIL S. et al., “Towards an argument interchange format”, The Knowledge Engineering Review, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 293–316, 2006.
  29. [CHO 00] CHOI F.Y.Y., “Advances in domain independent linear text segmentation”, Proceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics Conference, Seattle, WA, pp. 26–33, 2000.
  30. [COR 04] CORELLA J., SPENCER S., ZANNAB M., “An affirmed self and an open mind: Self-affirmation and sensitivity to argument strength”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 350–356, 2004.
  31. [CRU 86] CRUSE A., Lexical Semantics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986.
  32. [DUS 17] DUSMANU M., CABRIO E., VILLATA S., “Argument mining on Twitter: Arguments, facts and sources”, The 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark, September 2017.
  33. [EEM 82] VAN EEMEREN F.H., GROOTENDORST R., “The speech acts of arguing and convincing in externalized discussions”, Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–24, 1982.
  34. [EEM 92] VAN EEMEREN F., GROTENDORST R., Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 1992.
  35. [EEM 01] VAN EEMEREN F., GROTENDORST R., SNOECK HENKEMANS F., Argumentation, Analysis, Evaluation, Presentation, Routledge, Abingdon-on-Thames, 2001.
  36. [EEM 03] VAN EEMEREN F.H., HOUTLOSSER P., “The development of the pragmadialectical approach to argumentation”, Argumentation, vol. 17, pp. 387–403, 2003.
  37. [EGE 17] EGER S., DAXENBERGER J., GUREVYCH I., “Neural end-to-end learning for computational argumentation mining”, CoRR, abs/1704.06104, 2017.
  38. [FAU 14] FAULKNER A., “Automated classification of stance in student essays: an approach using stance target information and the Wikipedia link-based measure”, The Twenty-Seventh International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society (FLAIRS) Conference, Pensacola Beach, FL, 2014.
  39. [FEN 11] FENG V., HIRST G., “Classifying arguments by scheme”, Proceedings of 49th ACL: Human Language Technologies, Portland, OR, 2011.
  40. [FIE 07] FIEDLER A., HORACEK H., “Argumentation within deductive reasoning”, Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 49–70, 2007.
  41. [FLE 71] FLEISS J.L., “Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters”, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 76, no. 5, p. 378, 1971.
  42. [FRE 11] FREEMAN J.B., Argument Structure: Representation and Theory, Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, Germany, vol. 18, p. 154, 2011.
  43. [GET 05] GETOOR L., DIEHL C.P., “Link mining: A survey”, Acm Sigkdd Explorations Newsletter, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 3–12, 2005.
  44. [GHO 13] GHOSH D., MURESAN S., WACHOLDER N. et al., “Analyzing argumentative discourse units in online interactions”, ACL 2013, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argumentation Mining, ACL, Baltimore, ML, pp. 39–48, 2013.
  45. [GOT 14] GOTTIPATI S., QIU M., YANG L. et al., “An integrated model for user attribute discovery: A case study on political affiliation identification”, Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Springer, Hyderabad, India, pp. 434–446, 2014.
  46. [GOU 14] GOUDAS T., LOUIZOS C., PETASIS G. et al., “Argument extraction from news, blogs, and social media”, Hellenic Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Springer, Ioannina, Greece, pp. 41–58, 2014.
  47. [GRA 11] GRASSO F., HAM J., MASTHOFF J., “User models for motivational systems – the affective and the rational routes to persuasion”, Advances in User Modeling – UMAP 2011 Workshops, 2011.
  48. [GRE 17] GREEN N., “Manual identification of arguments with implicit conclusions using semantic rules for argument mining”, EMNLP17, Workshop on Argument Mining, 2017.
  49. [GRI 75] GRICE H.P., “Logic and conversation”, in COLE P., MORGAN J. (eds), Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3, Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 41–58, 1975.
  50. [GRI 90] GRIZE J.B., Logique et Langage, Ophryx, Paris, France, 1990.
  51. [HAB 87] HABERMAS J., Theory of Communicative Action, Volume Two: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, Translated by Thomas A. McCarthy, Beacon Press, Boston, MA, 1987.
  52. [HAB 14] HABERNAL I., Argumentation in user-generated content: annotation guidelines, Ubiquitous Knowledge Processing Lab (UKP Lab) Computer Science Department, Technische Universität Darmstadt, 2014.
  53. [HAB 17] HABERNAL I., GUREVYCH I., “Argumentation mining in user-generated web discourse”, Computational Linguistics, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 125–179, 2017.
  54. [HER 10] HERNAULT H., BOLLEGALA D., ISHIZUKA M., “Towards semi-supervised classification of discourse relations using feature correlations”, Proceedings of the 11th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, Association for Computational Linguistics, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 55–58, 2010.
  55. [HIT 06] HITCHCOCK D., VERHEIJ B., Arguing on the Toulmin Model, Springer, New York, 2006.
  56. [HOF 14] HOFFMANN M., BORENSTEIN J., “Understanding ill-structured engineering ethics problems through a collaborative learning and argument visualization approach”, Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 261–276, 2014.
  57. [HOF 15] HOFFMANN M.H., LINGLE J.A., “Facilitating problem-based learning by means of collaborative argument visualization software in advance”, Teaching Philosophy, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 371–398, 2015.
  58. [HOU 13] HOUY C., NIESEN T., FETTKE P. et al., “Towards automated identification and analysis of argumentation structures in the decision corpus of the German Federal Constitutional Court”, 2013 7th IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies (DEST), IEEE, Menlo Park, CA, pp. 72–77, 2013.
  59. [JAN 14] JANIER M., LAWRENCE J., REED C., “OVA+: An argument analysis interface”, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA, vol. 266, pp. 463–464, Pitlochry, Scotland, 2014.
  60. [JAN 16] JANIER M., REED C., “Corpus resources for dispute mediation discourse”, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016), pp. 1014–1021, 2016.
  61. [KAN 14] KANG J., SAINT-DIZIER P., “A discourse grammar for processing arguments in context”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2014, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 266, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 43–50, 2014.
  62. [KIM 14] KIM Y., “Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification”, Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pp. 1746–1751, 2014.
  63. [KON 16] KONAT B., BUDZYNSKA K., SAINT-DIZIER P., “Rephrase in argument structure”, Proceedings of the Foundations of the Language of Argumentation (FLA) Workshop, pp. 32–39, 2016.
  64. [KRI 04] KRIPPENDORFF K., “Reliability in content analysis”, Human Communication Research, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 411–433, 2004.
  65. [LAN 77] LANDIS J.R., KOCH G.G., “The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data”, Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 159–174, 1977.
  66. [LAW 12] LAWRENCE J., BEX F., REED C. et al., “AIFdb: Infrastructure for the argument web”, in VERHEIJ B., SZEIDER S., WOLTRAN S. (eds), Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 245, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 515–516, 2012.
  67. [LAW 15] LAWRENCE J., JANIER M., REED C., “Working with open argument corpora”, European Conference on Argumentation (ECA), 2015.
  68. [LAW 16] LAWRENCE J., REED C., “Argument mining using argumentation scheme structures”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings from COMMA 2016, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 287, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 379–390, 2016.
  69. [LEM 12] LEMKE J.L., “Analyzing verbal data: Principles, methods, and problems”, Second International Handbook of Science Education, pp. 1471–1484, Springer, New York, 2012.
  70. [LIE 16] LIEBECK M., ESAU K., CONRAD S., “What to do with an airport? Mining arguments in the German Online Participation Project Tempelhofer Feld”, Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argument Mining (ArgMining2016), pp. 144–153, 2016.
  71. [LIN 09] LIN Z., KAN M.-Y., NG H.T., “Recognizing implicit discourse relations in the Penn Discourse Treebank”, Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 343–351, 2009.
  72. [LIP 15] LIPPI M., TORRONI P., “Context-independent claim detection for argument mining”, Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2015.
  73. [LIP 16] LIPPI M., TORRONI P., “Argumentation mining: State of the art and emerging trends”, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 10:1–10:25, March 2016.
  74. [LLE 14] LLEWELLYN C., GROVER C., OBERLANDER J. et al., “Re-using an argument corpus to aid in the curation of social media collections”, CHAIR N. C.C., CHOUKRI K., DECLERCK T. et al. (eds), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14), European Language Resources Association (ELRA), Reykjavik, Iceland, 2014.
  75. [MAN 88] MANN W.C., THOMSON S.A., “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization”, Text, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 243–281, 1988.
  76. [MAN 01] MANI I., The Generative Lexicon, John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2001.
  77. [MAN 03] MANI I., SCHIFFMAN B., ZHANG J., “Inferring temporal ordering of events in news”, Companion Volume of the Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2003-Short Papers, Edmonton, Canada, 2003.
  78. [MAR 99] MARCU D., “A decision-based approach to rhetorical parsing”, Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, College Park, Maryland, 1999.
  79. [MAR 02] MARCU D., ECHIHABI A., “An unsupervised approach to recognizing discourse relations”, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2002.
  80. [MOC 09] MOCHALES PALAU R., MOENS M.-F., “Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text”, Proceedings of the 12th ICAIL, Barcelona, Spain, 2009.
  81. [MOC 11] MOCHALES R., MOENS M.-F., “Argumentation mining”, Artificial Intelligence and Law, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2011.
  82. [MOE 85] MOESCHLER J., Argumentation et conversation, Hatier, Paris, France, 1985.
  83. [MOE 07] MOENS M.-F., BOIY E., MOCHALES PALAU R. et al., “Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts”, ICAIL ’07, pp. 225–230, 2007.
  84. [MUN 88] MUNCH J., SWASY J., “Rhetorical question, summarization frequency, and argument strength effects on recall”, Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 69–76, 1988.
  85. [MUS 16] MUSI E., GHOSH D., MURESAN S., “Towards feasible guidelines for the annotation of argument schemes”, Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argument Mining, hosted by the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ArgMining@ACL 2016, August 12, The Association for Computer Linguistics, Berlin, Germany, 2016.
  86. [NAD 07] NADEAU D., SEKINE S., “A survey of named entity recognition and classification”, Lingvisticae Investigationes, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 3–26, 2007.
  87. [NEW 91] NEWMAN S., MARSHALL C., Pushing Toulmin too far: Learning from an argument representation scheme, Technical Report SSL-92, Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA, 1991.
  88. [NGU 07] NGUYEN N., GUO Y., “Comparisons of sequence labeling algorithms and extensions”, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Machine Learning, ACM, Corvallis, OR, pp. 681–688, 2007.
  89. [NGU 15] NGUYEN H., LITMAN D., “Extracting argument and domain words for identifying argument components in texts”, Proceedings of 2nd Workshop on Argumentation Mining, Denver, CO, 2015.
  90. [NGU 17] NGUYEN Q.V.H., DUONG C.T., NGUYEN T.T. et al., “Argument discovery via crowdsourcing”, The VLDB Journal, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 511–535, 2017.
  91. [ODO 00] O’DONNELL M., “RSTTool 2.4–a markup tool for rhetorical structure theory”, INLG’2000 Proceedings of the First International Conference on Natural Language Generation, Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, 2000.
  92. [OKE 77] O’KEEFE D.J., “Two concepts of arguments”, The Journal of the American Forensic Association, vol. XIII, no. 3, pp. 121–128, 1977.
  93. [OKA 08] OKADA A., BUCKINGHAM SHUM S., SHERBONE T. (eds), Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques, Springer, New York, 2008.
  94. [PAR 08] PARSONS S., ATKINSON S., HAIGH K., LEVITT K. et al., “Argument schemes for reasoning about trust”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2008, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 172, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 285–296, 2008.
  95. [PAR 14] PARK J., CARDIE C., “Identifying appropriate support for propositions in online user comments”, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argument Mining, hosted by the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ArgMining@ACL 2014, June 26, 2014, The Association for Computer Linguistics, Baltimore, MD, pp. 29–38, 2014.
  96. [PEL 13] PELDSZUS A., STEDE M., “From argument diagrams to argumentation mining in texts: A survey”, International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence (IJCINI), vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–31, 2013.
  97. [PEL 14] PELDSZUS A., “Towards segment-based recognition of argumentation structure in short texts”, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argumentation Mining, Association for Computational Linguistics, Baltimore, MD, pp. 88–97, 2014.
  98. [PER 58] PERELMAN C., OLBRECHTS TYTECA L., The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN, 1958.
  99. [PER 77] PERELMAN C., L’empire Rhétorique, Vrin, Paris, France, 1977.
  100. [PER 80] PEREIRA F., WARREN D., “Definite clause grammars for language analysis–a survey of the formalism and a comparison with augmented transition networks”, Artificial Intelligence, vol. 13, pp. 231–278, 1980.
  101. [PLA 96] PLANTIN C., L’argumentation, Le Seuil, Paris, France, 1996.
  102. [POL 95] POLLOCK J.L., Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
  103. [POT 17] POTASH P., ROMANOV A., RUMSHISKY A., “Here’s my point: Joint pointer architecture for argument mining”, Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2017, September 9–11, 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 1364–1373, 2017.
  104. [PUS 86] PUSTEJOVSKY J., The Generative Lexicon, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1986.
  105. [RAH 09] RAHWAN I., REED C., “The argument interchange format”, SIMARI G.R., RAHWAN I. (eds), Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 383–402, Springer, New York, 2009.
  106. [RAJ 16] RAJENDRAN P., BOLLEGALA D., PARSONS S., “Contextual stance classification of opinions: A step towards enthymeme reconstruction in online reviews”, Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Argument Mining (ArgMining2016), pp. 31–39, 2016.
  107. [REE 04] REED C., ROWE G., “Araucaria: Software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation”, International Journal of AI Tools, vol. 14, pp. 961–980, 2004.
  108. [REE 06] REED C., “Preliminary results from an argument corpus”, Bermúdez E.M., Miyares L.R. (eds), Linguistics in the Twenty-first Century, Scholars Press, Riga, Latvia, pp. 185–196, 2006.
  109. [REE 08a] REED C., MOCHALES PALAU R., ROWE G. et al., “Language Resources for Studying Argument”, Proceedings of the 6th conference on Language Resources and Evaluation-LREC 2008, pp. 91–100, 2008.
  110. [REE 08b] REED C., WELLS S., DEVEREUX J. et al., “AIF+: Dialogue in the Argument Interchange Format”, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 172, p. 311, 2008.
  111. [REE 17] REED C., BUDZYNSKA K., DUTHIE R. et al., “The Argument Web: An online ecosystem of tools, systems and services for argumentation”, Philosophy & Technology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 137–160, 2017.
  112. [REI 14] REISERT P., MIZUNO J., KANNO M. et al., “A corpus study for identifying evidence on microblogs”, Proceedings of LAW VIII-The 8th Linguistic Annotation Workshop, pp. 70–74, 2014.
  113. [RIC 08] RICHMOND V.P., MCCROSKEY J.C., HICKSON M., Nonverbal Behavior in Interpersonal Relations, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA, USA, 2008.
  114. [RIN 15] RINOTT R., DANKIN L., PEREZ C.A. et al., “Show me your evidence - an automatic method for context dependent evidence detection”, in Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 440–450, 2015.
  115. [ROS 12] ROSENTHAL S., MCKEOWN K., “Detecting opinionated claims in online discussions”, Sixth IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing, ICSC 2012, September 19–21, 2012, Palermo, Italy, pp. 30–37, 2012.
  116. [ROU 84] ROULET E., “Speech acts, discourse structure and pragmatic connectives”, Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 8, pp. 31–47, 1984.
  117. [SAI 12] SAINT-DIZIER P., “Processing natural language arguments with the TextCoop platform”, Journal of Argumentation and Computation, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 49–82, 2012.
  118. [SAI 14] SAINT-DIZIER P., Musical Rhetoric: Foundations and Annotation Schemes, ISTE Ltd, London and John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2014.
  119. [SAI 16a] SAINT-DIZIER P., “The bottleneck of knowledge and language resources”, Proceedings of LREC16, Portorož, Slovenia, 2016.
  120. [SAI 16b] SAINT-DIZIER P., “Challenges of argument mining: Generating an argument synthesis based on the qualia structure”, Proceedings of INLG16, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2016.
  121. [SAI 17] SAINT-DIZIER P., “Knowledge-driven argument mining based on the qualia structure”, Journal of Argumentation and Computation, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 193–210, 2017.
  122. [SAI 18] SAINT-DIZIER P., “A knowledge-based approach to warrant induction”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2018, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 305, IOS Press, Amsterdam, p. 289, 2018.
  123. [SAR 15] SARDIANOS C., KATAKIS I.M., PETASIS G. et al., “Argument extraction from news”, Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Argumentation Mining, pp. 56–66, 2015.
  124. [SAU 06] SAURÍ R., LITTMAN J., KNIPPEN B. et al., “TimeML annotation guidelines”, Version, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 31, 2006.
  125. [SCH 80] SCHIFFRIN D., “Meta-talk: Organizational and evaluative brackets in discourse”, Sociological Inquiry, vol. 50, pp. 199–236, 1980.
  126. [SCH 12] SCHNEIDER J., WYNER A.Z., “Identifying consumers’ arguments in text”, SWAIE, pp. 31–42, 2012.
  127. [SCH 13] SCHNEIDER J., SAMP K., PASSANT A. et al., “Arguments about deletion: How experience improves the acceptability of arguments in ad-hoc online task groups”, Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW’13, ACM, New York, NY, pp. 1069–1080, 2013.
  128. [SEA 69] SEARLE J.R., Speech Acts, An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1969.
  129. [SEA 85] SEARLE J.R., VANDERVEKEN D., Foundations of Illocutionary Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.
  130. [SEL 85] SELLS P., Lectures on Contemporary Syntactic Theories, CSLI Series, vol. 3, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1985.
  131. [SHI 86] SHIEBER S., An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar, CSLI Series vol. 4, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1986.
  132. [STA 14] STAB C., GUREVYCH I., “Annotating argument components and relations in persuasive essays”, Proceedings of COLING 2014, the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, Dublin, Ireland, pp. 1501–1510, 2014.
  133. [STA 15] STAB C., GUREVYCH I., Guidelines for annotating argumentation structures in persuasive essays, Ubiquitous Knowledge Processing Lab (UKP Lab) Computer Science Department, Technische Universität Darmstadt, May 2015.
  134. [STA 17] STAB C., GUREVYCH I., “Parsing argumentation structures in persuasive essays”, Computational Linguistics, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 619–659, 2017.
  135. [STE 00] STENT A., “Rhetorical structure in dialog”, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Narural Language Generation, Association for Computational Linguistics, Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, vol. 14, pp. 247–252, 2000.
  136. [STE 12] STENETORP P., PYYSALO S., TOPI G. et al., “BRAT: A web-based tool for NLPassisted text annotation”, Proceedings of the Demonstrations at the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, pp. 102–107, 2012.
  137. [SWA 15] SWANSON R., ECKER B., WALKER M., “Argument mining: Extracting arguments from online dialogue”, Proceedings of SIGDIAL15, Prague, Czech Republic, 2015.
  138. [TER 18] TERUEL M., CARDELLINO C., CARDELLINO F. et al., “Increasing argument annotation reproducibility by using inter-annotator agreement to improve guidelines”, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2018), Miyazaki, Japan, 2018.
  139. [TEU 99a] TEUFEL S. et al., Argumentative zoning: Information extraction from scientific text, PhD Thesis, Citeseer, 1999.
  140. [TEU 99b] TEUFEL S., CARLETTA J., MOENS M., “An annotation scheme for discourselevel argumentation in research articles”, Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, EACL ’99, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, pp. 110–117, 1999.
  141. [TEU 02] TEUFEL S., MOENS M., “Summarizing scientific articles: Experiments with relevance and rhetorical status”, Computational linguistics, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 409–445, 2002.
  142. [TOU 03] TOULMIN S., The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
  143. [VAN 07] VAN GELDER T., “The rationale for Rationale”, Law, Probability and Risk, vol. 6, nos 1–4, pp. 23–42, 2007.
  144. [VIL 12] VILLALBA M.G., SAINT-DIZIER P., “Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis”, Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2012, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applicaitons, vol. 245, IOS Publishing, Amsterdam, pp. 23–34, 2012.
  145. [VIS 18] VISSER J., DUTHIE R., LAWRENCE J. et al., “Intertextual correspondence for integrating corpora”, Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2018), Miyazaki, Japan, 2018.
  146. [WAC 14] WACHOLDER N., MURESAN S., GHOSH D. et al., “Annotating multiparty discourse: Challenges for agreement metrics”, Proceedings of the 8th Linguistic Annotation Workshop, 2014, August 23–24, Dublin, Ireland, 2014.
  147. [WAC 17] WACHSMUTH H., NADERI N., HOU Y. et al., “Computational argumentation quality assessment in natural language”, Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Valencia, Spain, pp. 176–187, April 2017.
  148. [WAL 96] WALTON D., Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, L. Erlbaum Associates, New York, NY, 1996.
  149. [WAL 08] WALTON D., REED C., MACAGNO F., Argumentation Schemes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.
  150. [WAL 12] WALKER M., ANAND P., ABBOT R., “A corpus for research on deliberation and debate”, Proceedings of LREC 2012, Istanbul, Turkey, 2012.
  151. [WAL 15a] WALTON D., Goal-Based Reasoning for Argumentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.
  152. [WAL 15b] WALTON D., MACAGNO F., “A classification system for argumentation schemes”, Argument & Computation, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 219–245, 2015.
  153. [WIE 87] WIERZBICKA A., English Speech Act Verbs: A Semantic Dictionary, Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987.
  154. [ZHA 03] ZHANG D., LEE W.S., “Question classification using support vector machines”, SIGIR 03 Proceedings of the 26th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, ACM, Toronto, Canada, pp. 26–32, 2003.
  155. [ZHA 11] ZHAO X., STRASSER A., CAPPELLA J.N. et al., “A measure of perceived argument strength: reliability and validity”, Communication Methods and Measures, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 48–75, 2011.
  156. [ZUK 00] ZUKERMAN I., ROGER M., KORB K., “Using argumentation strategies in automatic argument generation”, Proceedings of INLG 2000, Mitzpe Ramon, Israel, 2000.
..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset