Choctaw 'articles' in discourse

Discourse-Level Argumentation In Scientific Articles: Human And Automatic Annotation

In this paper we present a rhetorically defined annotation scheme which is part of our corpus-based method for the summarisation of scientific articles. The annotation scheme consists of seven non-hierarchical labels which model prototypical academic argumentation and expected intentional 'moves'. In a large-scale experiments with three expert coders, we found the scheme stable and reproducible...

An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles

In order to build robust automatic abstracting systems, there is a need for better training resources than are currently available. In this paper, we introduce an annotation scheme for scientific articles which can be used to build such a resource in a consistent way. The seven categories of the scheme are based on rhetorical moves of argumentation. Our experimental results show that the scheme...

Weasels, Hedges and Peacocks: Discourse-level Uncertainty in Wikipedia Articles

Uncertainty is an important linguistic phenomenon that is relevant in many areas of language processing. While earlier research mostly concentrated on the semantic aspects of uncertainty, here we focus on discourseand pragmaticsrelated aspects of uncertainty. We present a classification of such linguistic phenomena and introduce a corpus of Wikipedia articles in which the presented types of dis...

Discourse-Level Argumentation in Scientific Articles: Human and Automatic Annotation

Meta-Discourse Markers And Problem-Structuring In Scientific Articles

Knowledge about the argumentative structure of scientific articles can, amongst other things, be used to improve automatic abstracts. We argue that the argumentative structure of scientific discourse can be automatically detected because reasordng about problems, research tasks and solutions follows predictable patterns. Certain phrases explicitly mark the rhetorical status (communicative funct...