Argument Structure Prediction in Online Conversations: A Comparative Study of Modeling Paradigms and Task Architectures

arXiv:2609.39225v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Argument structure prediction (ASP) constructs complete argument structures from discourse by identifying argumentative units and their relations. While recent work has explored diverse approaches---including unified neural models, multi-step pipelines, and prompt-based large language models (LLMs)---their relative trade-offs remain under-explored, particularly in dialogical settings. We present a systematic evaluation of ASP under strict schema constraints, comparing supervised fine-tuning and prompt-based LLMs across single- and multi-step task architectures, generating complete argument structures from dialogical input end-to-end. We benchmark them on three diverse dialogical corpora adapted from Inference Anchoring Theory into bipolar argument structures. Under a shared evaluation framework, we assess predictive performance, cross-domain generalization, schema compliance, and computational efficiency. Our results show that ASP remains a challenging task, with identifying argumentative relations emerging as the primary bottleneck, largely due to the implicit and context-dependent nature of dialogical argumentation. To facilitate future research, we release our data processing pipeline and end-to-end modeling framework for computational ASP on dialogical corpora.

Related

• Cohesion-6K: An Arabic Dataset for Analyzing Social Cohesion and Conflict in Online Discourse
• FregeLogic at SemEval 2026 Task 11: A Hybrid Neuro-Symbolic Architecture for Content-Robust Syllogistic Validity Prediction
• BITS Pilani at SemEval-2026 Task 9: Structured Supervised Fine-Tuning with DPO Refinement for Polarization Detection
• ControBench: An Interaction-Aware Benchmark for Controversial Discourse Analysis on Social Networks

Source: arXiv cs.CL | 2026-10-01