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’23. Using a multi-sourced dataset of over 9K arguments, the systems achieved F1-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 F1-score of 0.39 for stimulation, hedonism, face, and humility.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Kiesel, J., Alshomary, M., Mirzakhmedova, N., Heinrich, M., Handke, N., Wachsmuth, H., & Stein, B. (2023). SemEval-2023 Task 4: ValueEval: Identification of Human Values Behind Arguments. In 17th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, SemEval 2023 - Proceedings of the Workshop (pp. 2287–2303). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.semeval-1.313
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.