-
A Graph-Based Context-Aware Model to Understand Online Conversations
Authors:
Vibhor Agarwal,
Anthony P. Young,
Sagar Joglekar,
Nishanth Sastry
Abstract:
Online forums that allow for participatory engagement between users have been transformative for the public discussion of many important issues. However, such conversations can sometimes escalate into full-blown exchanges of hate and misinformation. Existing approaches in natural language processing (NLP), such as deep learning models for classification tasks, use as inputs only a single comment o…
▽ More
Online forums that allow for participatory engagement between users have been transformative for the public discussion of many important issues. However, such conversations can sometimes escalate into full-blown exchanges of hate and misinformation. Existing approaches in natural language processing (NLP), such as deep learning models for classification tasks, use as inputs only a single comment or a pair of comments depending upon whether the task concerns the inference of properties of the individual comments or the replies between pairs of comments, respectively. But in online conversations, comments and replies may be based on external context beyond the immediately relevant information that is input to the model. Therefore, being aware of the conversations' surrounding contexts should improve the model's performance for the inference task at hand.
We propose GraphNLI, a novel graph-based deep learning architecture that uses graph walks to incorporate the wider context of a conversation in a principled manner. Specifically, a graph walk starts from a given comment and samples "nearby" comments in the same or parallel conversation threads, which results in additional embeddings that are aggregated together with the initial comment's embedding. We then use these enriched embeddings for downstream NLP prediction tasks that are important for online conversations. We evaluate GraphNLI on two such tasks - polarity prediction and misogynistic hate speech detection - and found that our model consistently outperforms all relevant baselines for both tasks. Specifically, GraphNLI with a biased root-seeking random walk performs with a macro-F1 score of 3 and 6 percentage points better than the best-performing BERT-based baselines for the polarity prediction and hate speech detection tasks, respectively.
△ Less
Submitted 16 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
GraphNLI: A Graph-based Natural Language Inference Model for Polarity Prediction in Online Debates
Authors:
Vibhor Agarwal,
Sagar Joglekar,
Anthony P. Young,
Nishanth Sastry
Abstract:
Online forums that allow participatory engagement between users have been transformative for public discussion of important issues. However, debates on such forums can sometimes escalate into full blown exchanges of hate or misinformation. An important tool in understanding and tackling such problems is to be able to infer the argumentative relation of whether a reply is supporting or attacking th…
▽ More
Online forums that allow participatory engagement between users have been transformative for public discussion of important issues. However, debates on such forums can sometimes escalate into full blown exchanges of hate or misinformation. An important tool in understanding and tackling such problems is to be able to infer the argumentative relation of whether a reply is supporting or attacking the post it is replying to. This so called polarity prediction task is difficult because replies may be based on external context beyond a post and the reply whose polarity is being predicted. We propose GraphNLI, a novel graph-based deep learning architecture that uses graph walk techniques to capture the wider context of a discussion thread in a principled fashion. Specifically, we propose methods to perform root-seeking graph walks that start from a post and captures its surrounding context to generate additional embeddings for the post. We then use these embeddings to predict the polarity relation between a reply and the post it is replying to. We evaluate the performance of our models on a curated debate dataset from Kialo, an online debating platform. Our model outperforms relevant baselines, including S-BERT, with an overall accuracy of 83%.
△ Less
Submitted 16 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
-
Who has the last word? Understanding How to Sample Online Discussions
Authors:
Gioia Boschi,
Anthony P. Young,
Sagar Joglekar,
Chiara Cammarota,
Nishanth Sastry
Abstract:
In online debates individual arguments support or attack each other, leading to some subset of arguments being considered more relevant than others. However, in large discussions readers are often forced to sample a subset of the arguments being put forth. Since such sampling is rarely done in a principled manner, users may not read all the relevant arguments to get a full picture of the debate. T…
▽ More
In online debates individual arguments support or attack each other, leading to some subset of arguments being considered more relevant than others. However, in large discussions readers are often forced to sample a subset of the arguments being put forth. Since such sampling is rarely done in a principled manner, users may not read all the relevant arguments to get a full picture of the debate. This paper is interested in answering the question of how users should sample online conversations to selectively favour the currently justified or accepted positions in the debate. We apply techniques from argumentation theory and complex networks to build a model that predicts the probabilities of the normatively justified arguments given their location in online discussions. Our model shows that the proportion of replies that are supportive, the number of replies that comments receive, and the locations of un-replied comments all determine the probability that a comment is a justified argument. We show that when the degree distribution of the number of replies is homogeneous along the discussion, for acrimonious discussions, the distribution of justified arguments depends on the parity of the graph level. In supportive discussions the probability of having justified comments increases as one moves away from the root. For discussion trees that have a non-homogeneous in-degree distribution, for supportive discussions we observe the same behaviour as before, while for acrimonious discussions we cannot observe the same parity-based distribution. This is verified with data obtained from the online debating platform Kialo. By predicting the locations of the justified arguments in reply trees, we can suggest which arguments readers should sample to grasp the currently accepted opinions in such discussions. Our models have important implications for the design of future online debating platforms.
△ Less
Submitted 10 April, 2021; v1 submitted 10 June, 2019;
originally announced June 2019.
-
Applying Abstract Argumentation Theory to Cooperative Game Theory
Authors:
Anthony P. Young,
David Kohan Marzagao,
Josh Murphy
Abstract:
We apply ideas from abstract argumentation theory to study cooperative game theory. Building on Dung's results in his seminal paper, we further the correspondence between Dung's four argumentation semantics and solution concepts in cooperative game theory by showing that complete extensions (the grounded extension) correspond to Roth's subsolutions (respectively, the supercore). We then investigat…
▽ More
We apply ideas from abstract argumentation theory to study cooperative game theory. Building on Dung's results in his seminal paper, we further the correspondence between Dung's four argumentation semantics and solution concepts in cooperative game theory by showing that complete extensions (the grounded extension) correspond to Roth's subsolutions (respectively, the supercore). We then investigate the relationship between well-founded argumentation frameworks and convex games, where in each case the semantics (respectively, solution concepts) coincide; we prove that three-player convex games do not in general have well-founded argumentation frameworks.
△ Less
Submitted 3 January, 2020; v1 submitted 15 May, 2019;
originally announced May 2019.
-
Notes on Abstract Argumentation Theory
Authors:
Anthony Peter Young
Abstract:
This note reviews Section 2 of Dung's seminal 1995 paper on abstract argumentation theory. In particular, we clarify and make explicit all of the proofs mentioned therein, and provide more examples to illustrate the definitions, with the aim to help readers approaching abstract argumentation theory for the first time. However, we provide minimal commentary and will refer the reader to Dung's paper…
▽ More
This note reviews Section 2 of Dung's seminal 1995 paper on abstract argumentation theory. In particular, we clarify and make explicit all of the proofs mentioned therein, and provide more examples to illustrate the definitions, with the aim to help readers approaching abstract argumentation theory for the first time. However, we provide minimal commentary and will refer the reader to Dung's paper for the intuitions behind various concepts. The appropriate mathematical prerequisites are provided in the appendices.
△ Less
Submitted 5 April, 2022; v1 submitted 18 June, 2018;
originally announced June 2018.
-
The Complete Extensions do not form a Complete Semilattice
Authors:
Anthony P. Young
Abstract:
In his seminal paper that inaugurated abstract argumentation, Dung proved that the set of complete extensions forms a complete semilattice with respect to set inclusion. In this note we demonstrate that this proof is incorrect with counterexamples. We then trace the error in the proof and explain why it arose. We then examine the implications for the grounded extension.
[Reason for withdrawal con…
▽ More
In his seminal paper that inaugurated abstract argumentation, Dung proved that the set of complete extensions forms a complete semilattice with respect to set inclusion. In this note we demonstrate that this proof is incorrect with counterexamples. We then trace the error in the proof and explain why it arose. We then examine the implications for the grounded extension.
[Reason for withdrawal continued] Page 4, Example 2 is not a counterexample to Dung 1995 Theorem 25(3). It was believed to be a counter-example because the author misunderstood ``glb'' to be set-theoretic intersection. But in this case, ``glb'' is defined to be other than set-theoretic intersection such that Theorem 25(3) is true.
The author was motivated to fully understand the lattice-theoretic claims of Dung 1995 in writing this note and was not aware that this issue is probably folklore; the author bears full responsibility for this error.
△ Less
Submitted 26 October, 2017; v1 submitted 15 October, 2017;
originally announced October 2017.
-
Prioritised Default Logic as Argumentation with Partial Order Default Priorities
Authors:
Anthony P. Young,
Sanjay Modgil,
Odinaldo Rodrigues
Abstract:
We express Brewka's prioritised default logic (PDL) as argumentation using ASPIC+. By representing PDL as argumentation and designing an argument preference relation that takes the argument structure into account, we prove that the conclusions of the justified arguments correspond to the PDL extensions. We will first assume that the default priority is total, and then generalise to the case where…
▽ More
We express Brewka's prioritised default logic (PDL) as argumentation using ASPIC+. By representing PDL as argumentation and designing an argument preference relation that takes the argument structure into account, we prove that the conclusions of the justified arguments correspond to the PDL extensions. We will first assume that the default priority is total, and then generalise to the case where it is a partial order. This provides a characterisation of non-monotonic inference in PDL as an exchange of argument and counter-argument, providing a basis for distributed non-monotonic reasoning in the form of dialogue.
△ Less
Submitted 25 August, 2016;
originally announced September 2016.
-
Argumentation Semantics for Prioritised Default Logic
Authors:
Anthony P. Young,
Sanjay Modgil,
Odinaldo Rodrigues
Abstract:
We endow prioritised default logic (PDL) with argumentation semantics using the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation, and prove that the conclusions of the justified arguments are exactly the prioritised default extensions. Argumentation semantics for PDL will allow for the application of argument game proof theories to the process of inference in PDL, making the reasons for accepting a c…
▽ More
We endow prioritised default logic (PDL) with argumentation semantics using the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation, and prove that the conclusions of the justified arguments are exactly the prioritised default extensions. Argumentation semantics for PDL will allow for the application of argument game proof theories to the process of inference in PDL, making the reasons for accepting a conclusion transparent and the inference process more intuitive. This also opens up the possibility for argumentation-based distributed reasoning and communication amongst agents with PDL representations of mental attitudes.
△ Less
Submitted 1 July, 2015; v1 submitted 26 June, 2015;
originally announced June 2015.
-
Exponential Complexity of the Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm for certain Satisfiability Problems
Authors:
Itay Hen,
A. P. Young
Abstract:
We determine the complexity of several constraint satisfaction problems using the quantum adiabatic algorithm in its simplest implementation. We do so by studying the size dependence of the gap to the first excited state of "typical" instances. We find that at large sizes N, the complexity increases exponentially for all models that we study. We also compare our results against the complexity of t…
▽ More
We determine the complexity of several constraint satisfaction problems using the quantum adiabatic algorithm in its simplest implementation. We do so by studying the size dependence of the gap to the first excited state of "typical" instances. We find that at large sizes N, the complexity increases exponentially for all models that we study. We also compare our results against the complexity of the analogous classical algorithm WalkSAT and show that the harder the problem is for the classical algorithm the harder it is also for the quantum adiabatic algorithm.
△ Less
Submitted 29 December, 2011; v1 submitted 30 September, 2011;
originally announced September 2011.
-
Complexity of several constraint satisfaction problems using the heuristic, classical, algorithm, WalkSAT
Authors:
Marco Guidetti,
A. P. Young
Abstract:
We determine the complexity of several constraint satisfaction problems using the heuristic algorithm, WalkSAT. At large sizes N, the complexity increases exponentially with N in all cases. Perhaps surprisingly, out of all the models studied, the hardest for WalkSAT is the one for which there is a polynomial time algorithm.
We determine the complexity of several constraint satisfaction problems using the heuristic algorithm, WalkSAT. At large sizes N, the complexity increases exponentially with N in all cases. Perhaps surprisingly, out of all the models studied, the hardest for WalkSAT is the one for which there is a polynomial time algorithm.
△ Less
Submitted 24 February, 2011;
originally announced February 2011.
-
Information science and technology as applications of the physics of signalling
Authors:
A. P. Young
Abstract:
Adopting the scientific method a theoretical model is proposed as foundation for information science and technology, extending the existing theory of signaling: a fact f becomes known in a physical system only following the success of a test f, tests performed primarily by human sensors and applied to (physical) phenomena within which further tests may be performed. Tests are phenomena and class…
▽ More
Adopting the scientific method a theoretical model is proposed as foundation for information science and technology, extending the existing theory of signaling: a fact f becomes known in a physical system only following the success of a test f, tests performed primarily by human sensors and applied to (physical) phenomena within which further tests may be performed. Tests are phenomena and classify phenomena. A phenomenon occupies both time and space, facts and inferences having physical counterparts which are phenomena of specified classes. Identifiers such as f are conventional, assigned by humans; a fact (f', f'') reports the success of a test of generic class f', the outcome f'' of the reported application classifying the successful test in more detail. Facts then exist only within structures of a form dictated by constraints on the structural design of tests. The model explains why responses of real time systems are not uniquely predictable and why restrictions, on concurrency in performing inferences within them, are needed. Improved methods, based on the model and applicable throughout the software life-cycle, are summarised in the paper. No report of similar work has been found in the literature.
△ Less
Submitted 1 February, 2009; v1 submitted 18 January, 2009;
originally announced January 2009.
