REVIEW 1 cited by
Diversity Over Size: On the Effect of Sample and Topic Sizes for Topic-Dependent Argument Mining Datasets
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The task of Argument Mining, that is extracting and classifying argument components for a specific topic from large document sources, is an inherently difficult task for machine learning models and humans alike, as large Argument Mining datasets are rare and recognition of argument components requires expert knowledge. The task becomes even more difficult if it also involves stance detection of retrieved arguments. In this work, we investigate the effect of Argument Mining dataset composition in few- and zero-shot settings. Our findings show that, while fine-tuning is mandatory to achieve acceptable model performance, using carefully composed training samples and reducing the training sample size by up to almost 90% can still yield 95% of the maximum performance. This gain is consistent across three Argument Mining tasks on three different datasets. We also publish a new dataset for future benchmarking.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Self-Rationalization in the Wild: A Large Scale Out-of-Distribution Evaluation on NLI-related tasks
Fine-tuning self-rationalization models on few examples transfers to 19 OOD NLI-related datasets nearly as well as full-data fine-tuning, and the Acceptability score is the best reference-free explanation metric tested.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.