Artificial Intelligence · 04.08.2026, 04:18 UTC
Comparing and Modeling Argumentation in German Political Communication across Arenas
| Schweregrad | info |
|---|---|
| Kategorie | Artificial Intelligence |
| Quelle | arXiv cs.CL ↗ |
| Veröffentlicht | 04.08.2026 UTC |
Sicherheitsmeldung mit Schweregrad noch nicht bewertet. Technische Details im Tab „Originaltext“; empfohlene Schritte in der Checkliste.
arXiv:2608.00288v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Deliberation, involving the formulation and exchange of arguments, forms an integral part of political decision making in democracies. Argumentation patterns however differ substantially across different political arenas, such as plenary speeches and committee meetings. However, despite a lot of interest in argumentation, there is comparatively little computational work on analyzing differences in patterns of political argumentation between arenas. Our work addresses this research gap. First, we present a 17k-sentence corpus with annotation for argumentative passages (argument and their justifications, both their boundaries and their categories) across three German political arenas (plenary speeches, committee meetings, and press conferences), keeping the topic (COVID-19) constant. Our analysis of the corpus finds that contrary to expectations, justification by domain-specific expertise is more frequent in press conferences than in committee meetings. Second, we present a pilot study on automatically identifying such argumentative passages. The results show that boundaries are hard to pin down, and models predictions additionally suffer from confirmation bias.
Maßnahmen
⬇ Als MarkdownVerwandte Beiträge
- info Best GPU Neoclouds 2026: CoreWeave, Nebius, Lambda, Crusoe, and Groq Ranked by Published Pricing and Contracted Power
- info Anthropic brings Mythos 5 to its Claude Security vulnerability scanner
- info How agents can delegate better
- info Why API Test Generation Is a Judgment Problem, Not a Code Generation Problem