On the PERSUADE corpus, adding generated argument-component tags to essay text raised automated scoring agreement from a QWK of 0.860 to 0.868, while error-only tags lowered it.
Argumentation Element Annotation Modeling using XLNet
1 Pith paper cite this work, alongside 1 external citations. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
This study demonstrates the effectiveness of XLNet, a transformer-based language model, for annotating argumentative elements in persuasive essays. XLNet's architecture incorporates a recurrent mechanism that allows it to model long-term dependencies in lengthy texts. Fine-tuned XLNet models were applied to three datasets annotated with different schemes - a proprietary dataset using the Annotations for Revisions and Reflections on Writing (ARROW) scheme, the PERSUADE corpus, and the Argument Annotated Essays (AAE) dataset. The XLNet models achieved strong performance across all datasets, even surpassing human agreement levels in some cases. This shows XLNet capably handles diverse annotation schemes and lengthy essays. Comparisons between the model outputs on different datasets also revealed insights into the relationships between the annotation tags. Overall, XLNet's strong performance on modeling argumentative structures across diverse datasets highlights its suitability for providing automated feedback on essay organization.
fields
cs.CL 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Automated Essay Scoring Incorporating Annotations from Automated Feedback Systems
On the PERSUADE corpus, adding generated argument-component tags to essay text raised automated scoring agreement from a QWK of 0.860 to 0.868, while error-only tags lowered it.