Genta Indra Winata, Frederikus Hudi, Patrick Amadeus Irawan, David Anugraha, Rifki Afina Putri, Wang Yutong, Adam Nohejl, Ubaidillah Ariq Prathama, Nedjma Ousidhoum, Afifa Amriani, Anar Rzayev, Anirban Das, Ashmari Pramodya, Aulia Adila, Bryan Wilie, Candy Olivia Mawalim, Cheng Ching Lam, Daud Abolade, Emmanuele Chersoni, Enrico Santus, Fariz Ikhwantri, Garry Kuwanto, Hanyang Zhao, Haryo Akbarianto Wibowo, Holy Lovenia, Jan Christian Blaise Cruz, Jan Wira Gotama Putra, Junho Myung, Lucky Susanto, Maria Angelica Riera Machin, Marina Zhukova, Michael Anugraha, Muhammad Farid Adilazuarda, Natasha Christabelle Santosa, Peerat Limkonchotiwat, Raj Dabre, Rio Alexander Audino, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Shi-Xiong Zhang, Stephanie Yulia Salim, Yi Zhou, Yinxuan Gui, David Ifeoluwa Adelani, En-Shiun Annie Lee, Shogo Okada, Ayu Purwarianti, Alham Fikri Aji, Taro Watanabe, Derry Tanti Wijaya, Alice Oh, Chong-Wah Ngo. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025.

Argumentation is ubiquitous in everyday discourse, and it is a skill that can be learned. In our society, it is also one that must be learned: education systems all over the world agree on the importance of argumentation skills. However, writing effective argumentation is difficult, and even more so if it has to be expressed in a foreign language. Existing artificial intelligence systems for language learning can help learners: they can provide objective feedback (e.g., concerning grammar and spelling), as well as providing learners with opportunities to identify errors and subsequently improve their texts. Even so, systems aiming at higher discourse-level skills, such as persuasiveness and content organisation, are still limited. In this article, we propose the novel task of sentence reordering for improving the logical flow of argumentative essays. To train such a computational system, we present a new corpus called ICNALE-AS2R, containing essays written by English-as-foreign-language learners from various Asian countries, that have been annotated with argumentative structure and sentence reordering. We also propose a novel method to automatically reorder sentences in imperfect essays, which is based on argumentative structure analysis. Given an input essay and its corresponding argumentative structure, we cast the reordering task as a traversal problem. Our sentence reordering system first determines the pairwise ordering relation between pairs of sentences that are connected by argumentative relations. In the second step, the system traverses the argumentative structure that has been augmented with pairwise ordering information, in order to generate the final output text. Empirical evaluation shows that in the task of reconstructing the final reordered essays in the dataset, our reordering system achieves .926 and .879 in longest common subsequence ratio and Kendall's Tau metrics, respectively. The system is also able to perform the reordering operation selectively, that is, it reorders sentences when necessary and retains the original input order when it is already optimal.

This paper provides the first broad overview of the relation between different interpretation methods and human eye-movement behaviour across different tasks and architectures. The interpretation methods of neural networks provide the information the machine considers important, while the human eye-gaze has been believed to be a proxy of the human cognitive process. Thus, comparing them explains machine behaviour in terms of human behaviour, leading to improvement in machine performance through minimising their difference. We consider three types of natural language processing (NLP) tasks: sentiment analysis, relation classification and question answering, and four interpretation methods based on: simple gradient, integrated gradient, input-perturbation and attention, and three architectures: LSTM, CNN and Transformer. We leverage two corpora annotated with eye-gaze information: the Zuco dataset and the MQA-RC dataset. This research sets up two research questions. First, we investigate whether the saliency (importance) of input-words conform with those from human eye-gaze features. To this end, we compute a saliency distance (SD) between input words (by an interpretation method) and an eye-gaze feature. SD is defined as the KL-divergence between the saliency distribution over input words and an eye-gaze feature. We found that the SD scores vary depending on the combinations of tasks, interpretation methods and architectures. Second, we investigate whether the models with good saliency conformity to human eye-gaze behaviour have better prediction performances. To this end, we propose a novel evaluation device called “SD-performance curve” (SDPC) which represents the cumulative model performance against the SD scores. SDPC enables us to analyse the underlying phenomena that were overlooked using only the macroscopic metrics, such as average SD scores and rank correlations, that are typically used in the past studies. We observe that the impact of good saliency conformity between humans and machines on task performance varies among the combinations of tasks, interpretation methods and architectures. Our findings should be considered when introducing eye-gaze information for model training to improve the model performance.

Abstract Argument mining (AM) aims to explain how individual argumentative discourse units (e.g. sentences or clauses) relate to each other and what roles they play in the overall argumentation. The automatic recognition of argumentative structure is attractive as it benefits various downstream tasks, such as text assessment, text generation, text improvement, and summarization. Existing studies focused on analyzing well-written texts provided by proficient authors. However, most English speakers in the world are non-native, and their texts are often poorly structured, particularly if they are still in the learning phase. Yet, there is no specific prior study on argumentative structure in non-native texts. In this article, we present the first corpus containing argumentative structure annotation for English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) essays, together with a specially designed annotation scheme. The annotated corpus resulting from this work is called “ICNALE-AS” and contains 434 essays written by EFL learners from various Asian countries. The corpus presented here is particularly useful for the education domain. On the basis of the analysis of argumentation-related problems in EFL essays, educators can formulate ways to improve them so that they more closely resemble native-level productions. Our argument annotation scheme is demonstrably stable, achieving good inter-annotator agreement and near-perfect intra-annotator agreement. We also propose a set of novel document-level agreement metrics that are able to quantify structural agreement from various argumentation aspects, thus providing a more holistic analysis of the quality of the argumentative structure annotation. The metrics are evaluated in a crowd-sourced meta-evaluation experiment, achieving moderate to good correlation with human judgments.

This paper introduces TIARA, a new publicly available web-based annotation tool for discourse relations and sentence reordering. Annotation tasks such as these, which are based on relations between large textual objects, are inherently hard to visualise without either cluttering the display and/or confusing the annotators. TIARA deals with the visual complexity during the annotation process by systematically simplifying the layout, and by offering interactive visualisation, including coloured links, indentation, and dual-view. TIARA’s text view allows annotators to focus on the analysis of logical sequencing between sentences. A separate tree view allows them to review their analysis in terms of the overall discourse structure. The dual-view gives it an edge over other discourse annotation tools and makes it particularly attractive as an educational tool (e.g., for teaching students how to argue more effectively). As it is based on standard web technologies and can be easily customised to other annotation schemes, it can be easily used by anybody. Apart from the project it was originally designed for, in which hundreds of texts were annotated by three annotators, TIARA has already been adopted by a second discourse annotation study, which uses it in the teaching of argumentation.