Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Parsimonious Argument Annotations for Hate Speech Counter-narratives

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

arxiv 2208.01099 v1 pith:WQJ2HG4T submitted 2022-08-01 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords counter-narrativeshatespeechtweetsannotatedannotatorsautomaticcounter-narrative
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We present an enrichment of the Hateval corpus of hate speech tweets (Basile et. al 2019) aimed to facilitate automated counter-narrative generation. Comparably to previous work (Chung et. al. 2019), manually written counter-narratives are associated to tweets. However, this information alone seems insufficient to obtain satisfactory language models for counter-narrative generation. That is why we have also annotated tweets with argumentative information based on Wagemanns (2016), that we believe can help in building convincing and effective counter-narratives for hate speech against particular groups. We discuss adequacies and difficulties of this annotation process and present several baselines for automatic detection of the annotated elements. Preliminary results show that automatic annotators perform close to human annotators to detect some aspects of argumentation, while others only reach low or moderate level of inter-annotator agreement.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools