Argumentative essay generation (AEG) is a complex task that requires advanced semantic understanding, logical reasoning, and organized integration of perspectives. Despite showing a promising performance, current efforts often overlook the dynamical and hierarchical nature of structural argumentative planning, and struggle with flexible rhetorical expression, leading to limited argument divergence and rhetorical optimization. Inspired by human debate behavior and Bitzer’s rhetorical situation theory, we propose a debate-driven rhetorical framework for argumentative writing. The uniqueness lies in three aspects: (1) dynamic assesses the divergence of viewpoints and progressively reveals the hierarchical outline of arguments based on a depth-then-breadth paradigm, improving the perspective divergence within argumentation; (2) simulates human debate through iterative defender-attacker interactions, improving the logical coherence of arguments; (3) incorporates Bitzer’s rhetorical situation theory to flexibly select appropriate rhetorical techniques, enabling the rhetorical expression. Experiments on four benchmarks validate that our approach significantly improves logical depth, argumentative diversity, and rhetorical persuasiveness over existing state-of-the-art models.

Word sense disambiguation (WSD) is a fundamental yet challenging task in natural language processing. In recent years, the advent of large language models (LLMs) has led to significant advancements in regular WSD tasks. However, most existing LLMs face two major issues that hinder their performance in WSD. Firstly, these models are often prone to misclassifying the correct meaning of an ambiguous word when confronted with contexts containing adversarial information. Secondly, there is a lack of sufficient adversarial WSD datasets, which severely limits the development and evaluation of adversarial WSD systems. To address these gaps, we propose a novel Multi-Agent Debate framework for Adversarial Word Sense Disambiguation (MADAWSD). The MADAWSD framework simulates a real-world debate environment where multiple agent roles, namely, the Debater, Moderator, Consensus-seeker, and Judge, engage in discussions about ambiguous words in the context of adversarial information. Through a collaborative mechanism among these agents, it achieves accurate WSD. Additionally, a novel dataset for Chinese adversarial WSD has been constructed, focusing on improving and evaluating the performance of WSD models in the Chinese language. Extensive experiments on both English and Chinese adversarial WSD datasets demonstrate that MADAWSD can seamlessly integrate with existing LLMs and significantly enhance their performance, showcasing broad generality and outstanding effectiveness.