arXiv AI By Stylianos Loukas Vasileiou, Olga Derendiaeva

Discourse-Aware Policy Analysis with Argumentation: A Hybrid LLM-Symbolic Framework for Disaster Governance

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 13260v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Policy documents shape governance outcomes, but their reasoning is often implicit.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

Structured Claim-Level Discourse Representations for Dense Health Narratives

The paper introduces a structured framework for claim-level discourse analysis in dense health narratives, addressing the limitations of existing topic- or sentiment-based representations. It identifies an average of 13.22 atomic claims per minute in social media health videos and proposes tuples that link each claim to thematic aspects, stance, and multidimensional pragmatic attributes. A benchmark of 1,191 manually annotated claims from 60 videos across four health domains is created, and experiments show that large language models perform well on thematic categorization and stance prediction but struggle with high-dimensional pragmatic profiling, indicating a need for task-specific inference strategies.

By Farnoushsadat Nilizadeh, Elham Pourabbas Vafa, Shirin Nilizadeh, Eduard Dragut
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 25

Paid Voices vs. Public Feeds: Interpretable Cross-Platform Theme-Based Analysis of Climate Discourse

arXiv:2601. 13317v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Climate discourse online shapes public understanding of climate change and informs political and policy debate, yet it unfolds across structurally different environments: paid advertising platforms host targeted, institutionally produced messaging, while public social media reflects largely organic, user-driven discussion.

By Samantha Sudhoff, Pranav Perumal, Zhaoqing Wu, Tunazzina Islam
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 31

Retrieving Relations, Detecting Fallacies: A RAG Approach to Political Debate Analysis

The paper introduces a retrieval‑augmented framework for detecting and classifying fallacies in political debate transcripts. By dynamically retrieving documents guided by argumentative relations of support and attack, the method leverages external knowledge to improve performance. Experiments on the ElecDeb60to20 benchmark show significant gains, raising macro‑F1 to 0.864 for detection and 0.725 for classification compared to non‑retrieval baselines.

By Deborah Dore, Greta Damo, Elena Cabrio, Serena Villata
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 10

Who Argues What? Joint Argument-Entity Detection and Classification in Political Debates

The paper introduces DNE‑ElecDeb, an enriched version of the USElecDeb dataset that annotates Debate Named Entities (DNEs) in both argumentative and non‑argumentative spans, and defines Debate Named Entity Recognition (DNER) as a new task. It proposes Joint Argument and Entity Tagging (JAET), a generative framework that fine‑tunes decoder‑only LLMs to insert inline argument and entity tags into debate turns while preserving the original transcript. JAET achieves significant improvements in joint AM+DNER performance (+27.3% relative F1 in the untyped setting and +41.9% in the typed setting) over sequential pipelines, and these gains generalize to Persuasive Essays (+26.6% and +52.7%).

By Lucio La Cava, Stefano Francesco Monea, Sergio Greco