Peer reviewing is a central process in modern research and essential for ensuring high quality and reliability of published work. At the same time, it is a time-consuming process and increasing interest in emerging fields often results in a high review workload, especially for senior researchers in this area. How to cope with this problem is an open question and it is vividly discussed across all major conferences. In this work, we propose an Argument Mining based approach for the assistance of editors, meta-reviewers, and reviewers. We demonstrate that the decision process in the field of scientific publications is driven by arguments and automatic argument identification is helpful in various use-cases. One of our findings is that arguments used in the peer-review process differ from arguments in other domains making the transfer of pre-trained models difficult. Therefore, we provide the community with a new dataset of peer-reviews from different computer science conferences with annotated arguments. In our extensive empirical evaluation, we show that Argument Mining can be used to efficiently extract the most relevant parts from reviews, which are paramount for the publication decision. Also, the process remains interpretable, since the extracted arguments can be highlighted in a review without detaching them from their context.

In many applications, it is required to analyze a graph merely based on its topology. In these cases, nodes can only be distinguished based on their structural neighborhoods and it is common that nodes having the same functionality or role yield similar neighborhood structures. In this work, we investigate two problems: (1) how to create structural node embeddings which describe a node’s role and (2) how important the nodes’ roles are for characterizing entire graphs. To describe the role of a node, we explore the structure within the local neighborhood (or multiple local neighborhoods of various extents) of the node in the vertex domain, compute the visiting probability distribution of nodes in the local neighborhoods and summarize each distribution to a single number by computing its entropy. Furthermore, we argue that the roles of nodes are important to characterize the entire graph. Therefore, we propose to aggregate the role representations to describe whole graphs for graph classification tasks. Our experiments show that our new role descriptors outperform state-of-the-art structural node representations that are usually more expensive to compute. Additionally, we achieve promising results compared to advanced state-of-the-art approaches for graph classification on various benchmark datasets, often outperforming these approaches.

In this work we address the problem of argument search. The purpose of argument search is the distillation of pro and contra arguments for requested topics from large text corpora. In previous works, the usual approach is to use a standard search engine to extract text parts which are relevant to the given topic and subsequently use an argument recognition algorithm to select arguments from them. The main challenge in the argument recognition task, which is also known as argument mining, is that often sentences containing arguments are structurally similar to purely informative sentences without any stance about the topic. In fact, they only differ semantically. Most approaches use topic or search term information only for the first search step and therefore assume that arguments can be classified independently of a topic. We argue that topic information is crucial for argument mining, since the topic defines the semantic context of an argument. Precisely, we propose different models for the classification of arguments, which take information about a topic of an argument into account. Moreover, to enrich the context of a topic and to let models understand the context of the potential argument better, we integrate information from different external sources such as Knowledge Graphs or pre-trained NLP models. Our evaluation shows that considering topic information, especially in connection with external information, provides a significant performance boost for the argument mining task.

In this work we propose LASAGNE, a methodology to learn locality and structure aware graph node embeddings in an unsupervised way. In particular, we show that the performance of existing random-walk based approaches depends strongly on the structural properties of the graph, e.g., the size of the graph, whether the graph has a flat or upward-sloping Network Community Profile (NCP), whether the graph is expander-like, whether the classes of interest are more k-core-like or more peripheral, etc. For larger graphs with flat NCPs that are strongly expander-like, existing methods lead to random walks that expand rapidly, touching many dissimilar nodes, thereby leading to lower-quality vector representations that are less useful for downstream tasks. Rather than relying on global random walks or neighbors within fixed hop distances, LASAGNE exploits strongly local Approximate Personalized PageRank stationary distributions to more precisely engineer local information into node embeddings. This leads, in particular, to more meaningful and more useful vector representations of nodes in poorly-structured graphs. We show that LASAGNE leads to significant improvement in downstream multi-label classification for larger graphs with flat NCPs and that it is comparable for smaller graphs with upward-sloping NCPs.