A computational argumentation framework evaluates LLM summaries of parliamentary debates by checking preservation of formal argument structures tied to contested proposals.
Keane, Eoin M
2 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
2
Pith papers citing it
citation-role summary
background 1
citation-polarity summary
years
2026 2verdicts
UNVERDICTED 2roles
background 1polarities
background 1representative citing papers
Formalizing personalization as individual actionability in causal recourse shows hard constraints degrade validity and plausibility while revealing socio-demographic disparities in costs.
citing papers explorer
-
Evaluating LLM-Driven Summarisation of Parliamentary Debates with Computational Argumentation
A computational argumentation framework evaluates LLM summaries of parliamentary debates by checking preservation of formal argument structures tied to contested proposals.
-
From Universal to Individualized Actionability: Revisiting Personalization in Algorithmic Recourse
Formalizing personalization as individual actionability in causal recourse shows hard constraints degrade validity and plausibility while revealing socio-demographic disparities in costs.