A quantitative bipolar argumentation framework with five metrics is proposed to evaluate LLM debate summaries by comparing argument structures extracted from source debates and their summaries.
Title resolution pending
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
1
Pith paper citing it
fields
cs.CL 1years
2026 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Evaluating LLM-Driven Summarisation of Parliamentary Debates with Computational Argumentation
A quantitative bipolar argumentation framework with five metrics is proposed to evaluate LLM debate summaries by comparing argument structures extracted from source debates and their summaries.