BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Johannes Daxenberger

Johannes Daxenberger contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computation and Language

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Aspect-Controlled Neural Argument Generation

We rely on arguments in our daily lives to deliver our opinions and base them on evidence, making them more convincing in turn. However, finding and formulating arguments can be challenging. In this work, we train a language model for argument generation that can be controlled on a fine-grained level to generate sentence-level arguments for a given topic, stance, and aspect. We define argument aspect detection as a necessary method to allow this fine-granular control and crowdsource a dataset with 5,032 arguments annotated with aspects. Our evaluation shows that our generation model is able to generate high-quality, aspect-specific arguments. Moreover, these arguments can be used to improve the performance of stance detection models via data augmentation and to generate counter-arguments. We publish all datasets and code to fine-tune the language model.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Stance Detection Benchmark: How Robust Is Your Stance Detection?

Stance Detection (StD) aims to detect an author's stance towards a certain topic or claim and has become a key component in applications like fake news detection, claim validation, and argument search. However, while stance is easily detected by humans, machine learning models are clearly falling short of this task. Given the major differences in dataset sizes and framing of StD (e.g. number of classes and inputs), we introduce a StD benchmark that learns from ten StD datasets of various domains in a multi-dataset learning (MDL) setting, as well as from related tasks via transfer learning. Within this benchmark setup, we are able to present new state-of-the-art results on five of the datasets. Yet, the models still perform well below human capabilities and even simple adversarial attacks severely hurt the performance of MDL models. Deeper investigation into this phenomenon suggests the existence of biases inherited from multiple datasets by design. Our analysis emphasizes the need of focus on robustness and de-biasing strategies in multi-task learning approaches. The benchmark dataset and code is made available.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2017arXiv

What is the Essence of a Claim? Cross-Domain Claim Identification

Argument mining has become a popular research area in NLP. It typically includes the identification of argumentative components, e.g. claims, as the central component of an argument. We perform a qualitative analysis across six different datasets and show that these appear to conceptualize claims quite differently. To learn about the consequences of such different conceptualizations of claim for practical applications, we carried out extensive experiments using state-of-the-art feature-rich and deep learning systems, to identify claims in a cross-domain fashion. While the divergent perception of claims in different datasets is indeed harmful to cross-domain classification, we show that there are shared properties on the lexical level as well as system configurations that can help to overcome these gaps.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access