Argumentation is ubiquitous in natural language communication, from politics and media to everyday work and private life. Many arguments derive their persuasive power from human values, such as self-directed thought or tolerance, albeit often implicitly. These values are key to understanding the semantics of arguments, as they are generally accepted as justifications for why a particular option is ethically desirable. Can automated systems uncover the values on which an argument draws? To answer this question, 39 teams submitted runs to ValueEval’23. Using a multi-sourced dataset of over 9K arguments, the systems achieved F 1-scores up to 0.87 (nature) and over 0.70 for three more of 20 universal value categories. However, many challenges remain, as evidenced by the low peak F 1-score of 0.39 for stimulation, hedonism, face, and humility.
%0 Generic
%1 a9787c04f4de457b97f358921415c2b9
%A Kiesel, Johannes
%A Alshomary, Milad
%A Mirzakhmedova, Nailia
%A Heinrich, Maximilian
%A Handke, Nicolas
%A Wachsmuth, Henning
%A Stein, Benno
%D 2023
%K #sys:relevantfor:l3s myown nlp
%P 2287--2303
%R 10.18653/V1/2023.SEMEVAL-1.313
%T SemEval-2023 Task 4: ValueEval: Identification of Human Values Behind Arguments
%X Argumentation is ubiquitous in natural language communication, from politics and media to everyday work and private life. Many arguments derive their persuasive power from human values, such as self-directed thought or tolerance, albeit often implicitly. These values are key to understanding the semantics of arguments, as they are generally accepted as justifications for why a particular option is ethically desirable. Can automated systems uncover the values on which an argument draws? To answer this question, 39 teams submitted runs to ValueEval’23. Using a multi-sourced dataset of over 9K arguments, the systems achieved F 1-scores up to 0.87 (nature) and over 0.70 for three more of 20 universal value categories. However, many challenges remain, as evidenced by the low peak F 1-score of 0.39 for stimulation, hedonism, face, and humility.
@conference{a9787c04f4de457b97f358921415c2b9,
abstract = {Argumentation is ubiquitous in natural language communication, from politics and media to everyday work and private life. Many arguments derive their persuasive power from human values, such as self-directed thought or tolerance, albeit often implicitly. These values are key to understanding the semantics of arguments, as they are generally accepted as justifications for why a particular option is ethically desirable. Can automated systems uncover the values on which an argument draws? To answer this question, 39 teams submitted runs to ValueEval{\textquoteright}23. Using a multi-sourced dataset of over 9K arguments, the systems achieved F 1-scores up to 0.87 (nature) and over 0.70 for three more of 20 universal value categories. However, many challenges remain, as evidenced by the low peak F 1-score of 0.39 for stimulation, hedonism, face, and humility.},
added-at = {2024-02-13T13:24:54.000+0100},
author = {Kiesel, Johannes and Alshomary, Milad and Mirzakhmedova, Nailia and Heinrich, Maximilian and Handke, Nicolas and Wachsmuth, Henning and Stein, Benno},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/20852aa8174fd39716496a5c4c1121bda/ail3s},
doi = {10.18653/V1/2023.SEMEVAL-1.313},
interhash = {f4339d9b8c5658b8dbda99b462175c8d},
intrahash = {0852aa8174fd39716496a5c4c1121bda},
keywords = {#sys:relevantfor:l3s myown nlp},
language = {English},
pages = {2287--2303},
timestamp = {2024-02-27T12:19:46.000+0100},
title = {SemEval-2023 Task 4: ValueEval: Identification of Human Values Behind Arguments},
year = 2023
}