This paper presents models for detecting agreement disagreement in online discussions. In this work we show that by using a Siamese inspired architecture to encode the discussions, we no longer need to rely on hand-crafted features to exploit the meta thread structure. We evaluate our model on existing online discussion corpora - ABCD, IAC and AWTP. Experimental results on ABCD dataset show that by fusing lexical and word embedding features, our model achieves the state of the art performance of 0.804 average F1 score. We also show that the model trained on ABCD dataset performs competitively on relatively smaller annotated datasets (IAC and AWTP).
Recently, researchers have turned their attention towards (dis)agreement detection in online discussions. The prior work was geared towards performing 2-way classification of agreement disagreement. @cite_49 used various sentiment, emotional and durational features to detect local and global (dis)agreement in discussion forums. @cite_38 performed (dis)agreement on annotated posts from the Internet Argument Corpus (IAC) @cite_37 . They investigated various manual labelled features, which are however difficult to reproduce as they are not annotated in other datasets. To benchmark the results, we've also incorporated the IAC corpus in our experiments. Quite recently, @cite_6 proposed a 3-way classification by exploiting meta-thread structures and accommodation between participants. They also proposed a naturally occurring dataset ABCD (Agreement by Create Debaters) which was about 25 times larger than prior existing corpus. We've trained our classifier on this larger dataset. @cite_9 proposed (dis)agreement detection with an isotonic Conditional Random Fields (isotonic CRF) based sequential model. @cite_46 proposed features motivated by theoretical predictions to perform (dis)agreement detection. However, they've used hand-crafted patterns as features and these features miss few real world scenarios reducing the performance of the classifier.
@cite_38 @cite_37 @cite_9 @cite_6 @cite_49 @cite_46
2250454469 2964079262 2161354826 2251147786
We study the problem of agreement and disagreement detection in online discussions. An isotonic Conditional Random Fields (isotonic CRF) based sequential model is proposed to make predictions on sentence- or segment-level. We automatically construct a socially-tuned lexicon that is bootstrapped from existing general-purpose sentiment lexicons to further improve the performance. We evaluate our agreement and disagreement tagging model on two disparate online discussion corpora -- Wikipedia Talk pages and online debates. Our model is shown to outperform the state-of-the-art approaches in both datasets. For example, the isotonic CRF model achieves F1 scores of 0.74 and 0.67 for agreement and disagreement detection, when a linear chain CRF obtains 0.58 and 0.56 for the discussions on Wikipedia Talk pages. We study the problem of agreement and disagreement detection in online discussions. An isotonic Conditional Random Fields (isotonic CRF) based sequential model is proposed to make predictions on sentence- or segment-level. We automatically construct a socially-tuned lexicon that is bootstrapped from existing general-purpose sentiment lexicons to further improve the performance. We evaluate our agreement and disagreement tagging model on two disparate online discussion corpora ‐ Wikipedia Talk pages and online debates. Our model is shown to outperform the state-of-the-art approaches in both datasets. For example, the isotonic CRF model achieves F1 scores of 0.74 and 0.67 for agreement and disagreement detection, when a linear chain CRF obtains 0.58 and 0.56 for the discussions on Wikipedia Talk pages. We present Conditional Random Fields based approaches for detecting agreement disagreement between speakers in English broadcast conversation shows. We develop annotation approaches for a variety of linguistic phenomena. Various lexical, structural, durational, and prosodic features are explored. We compare the performance when using features extracted from automatically generated annotations against that when using human annotations. We investigate the efficacy of adding prosodic features on top of lexical, structural, and durational features. Since the training data is highly imbalanced, we explore two sampling approaches, random downsampling and ensemble downsampling. Overall, our approach achieves 79.2 (precision), 50.5 (recall), 61.7 (F1) for agreement detection and 69.2 (precision), 46.9 (recall), and 55.9 (F1) for disagreement detection, on the English broadcast conversation data. We investigate the novel task of online dispute detection and propose a sentiment analysis solution to the problem: we aim to identify the sequence of sentence-level sentiments expressed during a discussion and to use them as features in a classifier that predicts the DISPUTE NON-DISPUTE label for the discussion as a whole. We evaluate dispute detection approaches on a newly created corpus of Wikipedia Talk page disputes and find that classifiers that rely on our sentiment tagging features outperform those that do not. The best model achieves a very promising F1 score of 0.78 and an accuracy of 0.80.