Research and Development

Evaluating Argumentation and Debate

Assessing Argument Quality

Computational Argumentation Quality Assessment in Natural Language by Henning Wachsmuth, Nona Naderi, Yufang Hou, Yonatan Bilu, Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Tim A. Thijm, Graeme Hirst and Benno Stein, Rhetoric, Logic, and Dialectic: Advancing Theory-based Argument Quality Assessment in Natural Language Processing by Anne Lauscher, Lily Ng, Courtney Napoles and Joel Tetreault, Argumentation Quality Assessment: Theory vs. Practice by Henning Wachsmuth, Nona Naderi, Ivan Habernal, Yufang Hou, Graeme Hirst, Iryna Gurevych and Benno Stein, Automatic Argument Quality Assessment - New Datasets and Methods by Assaf Toledo, Shai Gretz, Edo Cohen-Karlik, Roni Friedman, Elad Venezian, Dan Lahav, Michal Jacovi, Ranit Aharonov and Noam Slonim and A Large-scale Dataset for Argument Quality Ranking: Construction and Analysis by Shai Gretz, Roni Friedman, Edo Cohen-Karlik, Assaf Toledo, Dan Lahav, Ranit Aharonov and Noam Slonim.

Assessing Argumentative Essays

Towards Automated Analysis of Student Arguments by Nancy L. Green, Modeling Argument Strength in Student Essays by Isaac Persing and Vincent Ng and Applying Argumentation Schemes for Essay Scoring by Yi Song, Michael Heilman, Beata B. Klebanov and Paul Deane.

Judging Debate

A Multimodal Predictive Model of Successful Debaters or How I Learned to Sway Votes by Maarten Brilman and Stefan Scherer, Multimodal Prediction of the Audience's Impression in Political Debates by Pedro B. Santos and Iryna Gurevych, Towards Debate Automation: A Recurrent Model for Predicting Debate Winners by Peter Potash and Anna Rumshisky and Winning on the Merits: The Joint Effects of Content and Style on Debate Outcomes by Lu Wang, Nick Beauchamp, Sarah Shugars and Kechen Qin.