On the Retrieval of Wikipedia Articles Containing Claims on Controversial Topics

ABSTRACT

This work presents a novel claim-oriented document retrieval task. For a given controversial topic, relevant articles containing claims that support or contest the topic are retrieved from a Wikipedia corpus. For that, a two-step retrieval approach is proposed. At the first step, an initial pool of articles that are relevant to the topic are retrieved using state-of-the-art retrieval methods. At the second step, articles in the initial pool are re-ranked according to their potential to contain as many relevant claims as possible using several claim discovery features. Hence, the second step aims at maximizing the overall claim recall of the retrieval system. Using a recently published claims benchmark, the proposed retrieval approach is demonstrated to provide more relevant claims compared to several other retrieval alternatives.

References

1. E. Aharoni, A. Polnarov, T. Lavee, D. Hershcovich, R. Levy, R. Rinott, D. Gutfreund, and N. Slonim. A benchmark dataset for automatic detection of claims and evidence in the context of controversial topics. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argumentation Mining, ACL '14, 2014.
2. P. Bellot, A. Doucet, S. Geva, S. Gurajada, J. Kamps, G. Kazai, M. Koolen, A. Mishra, V. Moriceau, J. Mothe, et al. Overview of inex 2013. In Information Access Evaluation. Multilinguality, Multimodality, and Visualization, pages 269--281. Springer, 2013.
3. E. Cabrio and S. Villata. Combining textual entailment and argumentation theory for supporting online debates interactions. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Short Papers - Volume 2, ACL '12, pages 208--212, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 2012. Association for Computational Linguistics.
4. J. P. Callan. Passage-level evidence in document retrieval. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR '94, pages 302--310, New York, NY, USA, 1994. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.
5. D. Carmel, E. Farchi, Y. Petruschka, and A. Soffer. Automatic query refinement using lexical affinities with maximal information gain. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR '02, pages 283--290, New York, NY, USA, 2002. ACM.
6. S. Dori-Hacohen and J. Allan. Detecting controversy on the web. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Conference on information & knowledge management, CIKM '13, pages 1845--1848, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM.
7. A. Freeley and D. Steinberg. Argumentation and debate. Cengage Learning, 2013.
8. S. Geva, J. Kamps, M. Lethonen, R. Schenkel, J. A. Thom, and A. Trotman. Overview of the inex 2009 ad hoc track. focused retrieval and evaluation. In Focused retrieval and evaluation, pages 4--25. Springer, 2010.
9. O. Kolomiyets and M.-F. Moens. A survey on question answering technology from an information retrieval perspective. Information Sciences, 181(24):5412--5434, 2011.
10. M. Koolen, G. Kazai, M. Preminger, and A. Doucet. Overview of the inex 2013 social book search track. In In CLEF 2013 Evaluation Labs and Workshop, Online Working Notes, 2013.
11. R. Levy, Y. Bilu, D. Hershcovich, E. Aharoni, and N. Slonim. Context dependent claim detection. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Computatinal Linguistics, COLIG '14, 2014.
12. B. Liu and L. Zhang. A survey of opinion mining and sentiment analysis. In Mining Text Data, pages 415--463. Springer, 2012.
13. O. Medelyan, D. Milne, C. Legg, and I. H. Witten. Mining meaning from wikipedia. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 67(9):716--754, Sept. 2009.
14. R. M. Palau and M.-F. Moens. Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text. In Proceedings the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ICAIL '09, pages 98--107, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.
15. J. Pehcevski, J. A. Thom, et al. Evaluating focused retrieval tasks. In SIGIR 2007 Workshop on Focused Retrieval, 2007.
16. S. Robertson, S. Walker, S. Jones, M. Hancock-Beaulieu, and M. Gatford. Okapi at trec-3. pages 109--126, 1996.
17. W. Song, Y. Zhang, Y. Xie, T. Liu, and S. Li. Query term ranking based on search results overlap. In Proceedings of the 34th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR '11, pages 1253--1254, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM.
18. S. Toulmin. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, 1958.
19. B.-Q. Vuong, E.-P. Lim, A. Sun, M.-T. Le, H. W. Lauw, and K. Chang. On ranking controversies in wikipedia: Models and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, WSDM '08, pages 171--182, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.
20. S. Wu. Data Fusion in Information Retrieval. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2012.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Collaborative and social computing

    • Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms

      • Social navigation