Dialogue models are often enriched with extensive external knowledge to provide informative responses through a retrieval-augmented pipeline.Nevertheless, retrieval-augmented approaches rely on finely annotated retrieval training data and knowledge-grounded response generation data, making it costly to transfer. To tackle this challenge, this paper proposed a retrieval-free approach, KiDG, by automatically turning knowledge documents into simulated multi-turn dialogues through a Multi-Document Traversal algorithm. The simulated knowledge-intensive dialogues constructed by KiDG in one domain can be easily used to train and enhance pre-trained dialogue models’ knowledge w.r.t. this domain without costly annotation.We conduct extensive experiments comparing retrieval-augmented models and a variety of retrieval-free models. We found that dialogue models enhanced with data simulated with KiDG largely outperform state-of-the-art retrieval-free methods, and it achieves comparable performance compared to retrieval-augmented methods while being better, and cheaper at domain transfer.

Training grounded response generation models often requires a large collection of grounded dialogues. However, it is costly to build such dialogues. In this paper, we present a synthetic data generation framework (SynDG) for grounded dialogues. The generation process utilizes large pre-trained language models and freely available knowledge data (e.g., Wikipedia pages, persona profiles, etc.). The key idea of designing SynDG is to consider dialogue flow and coherence in the generation process. Specifically, given knowledge data, we first heuristically determine a dialogue flow, which is a series of knowledge pieces. Then, we employ T5 to incrementally turn the dialogue flow into a dialogue. To ensure coherence of both the dialogue flow and the synthetic dialogue, we design a two-level filtering strategy, at the flow-level and the utterance-level respectively. Experiments on two public benchmarks show that the synthetic grounded dialogue data produced by our framework is able to significantly boost model performance in both full training data and low-resource scenarios.

Argument pair extraction (APE) aims to extract interactive argument pairs from two passages within a discussion. The key challenge of APE is to effectively capture the complex context-aware interactive relations of arguments between the two passages. In this paper, we elicit relational semantic knowledge from large-scale pre-trained language models (PLMs) via a probing technique. The induced sentence-level relational probing graph can help capture rich explicit interactive relations between argument pairs effectively. Since the relevance score of a sentence pair within a passage is generally larger than that of the sentence pair from different passages, each sentence would prefer to propagate information within the same passage and under-explore the interactive relations between two passages. To tackle this issue, we propose a graph decomposition method to decompose the probing graph into four sub-graphs from intra- and inter-passage perspectives, where the intra-passage graphs can help detect argument spans within each passage and the inter-passage graphs can help identify the argument pairs between the review and rebuttal passages. Experimental results on two benchmark datasets show that our method achieves substantial improvements over strong baselines for APE.

Extracting fine-grained structural information between argumentation component (AC) pairs is essential for argumentation relation classification (ARC). However, most previous studies attempt to model the relationship between AC pairs using AC level similarity or semantically relevant features. They ignore the complex interaction between AC pairs and cannot effectively reason the argumentation relation deeply.Therefore, in this paper, we propose a novel dual prior graph neural network (DPGNN) to jointly explore the probing knowledge derived from pre-trained language models (PLMs) and the syntactical information for comprehensively modeling the relationship between AC pairs. Specifically, we construct a probing graph by using probing knowledge derived from PLMs to recognize and align the relational information within and across the argumentation components. In addition, we propose a mutual dependency graph for the AC pair to reason the fine-grained syntactic structural information, in which the syntactical correlation between words is set by the dependency information within AC and mutual attention mechanism across ACs. The knowledge learned from the probing graph and the dependency graph are combined to comprehensively capture the aligned relationships of AC pairs for improving the results of ARC. Experimental results on three public datasets show that DPGNN outperforms the state-of-the-art baselines by a noticeable margin.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a promising approach to fine-tune offline pretrained GPT-2 model in task-oriented dialogue (TOD) systems. In order to obtain human-like online interactions while extending the usage of RL, building pretrained user simulators (US) along with dialogue systems (DS) and facilitating jointly fine-tuning via RL becomes prevalent. However, joint training brings distributional shift problem caused by compounding exposure bias. Existing methods usually iterative update US and DS to ameliorate the ensued non-stationarity problem, which could lead to sub-optimal policy and less sample efficiency. To take a step further for tackling the problem, we introduce an Offline-to-oNline Co-Evolutional (ONCE) framework, which enables bias-aware concurrent joint update for RL-based fine-tuning whilst takes advantages from GPT-2 based end-to-end modeling on US and DS. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ONCE builds high-quality loops of policy learning and dialogues data collection, and achieves state-of-the-art online and offline evaluation results on MultiWOZ2.1 dataset. Opensourced code will be implemented with Mindspore (MS, 2022) and released on our homepage.

Argument pair extraction (APE) aims to automatically mine argument pairs from two interrelated argumentative documents. Existing studies typically identify argument pairs indirectly by predicting sentence-level relations between two documents, neglecting the modeling of the holistic argument-level interactions. Towards this issue, we propose to address APE via a machine reading comprehension (MRC) framework with two phases. The first phase employs an argument mining (AM) query to identify all arguments in two documents. The second phase considers each identified argument as an APE query to extract its paired arguments from another document, allowing to better capture the argument-level interactions. Also, this framework enables these two phases to be jointly trained in a single MRC model, thereby maximizing the mutual benefits of them. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach achieves the best performance, outperforming the state-of-the-art method by 7.11% in F1 score.

Argument generation is an important but challenging task in computational argumentation.Existing studies have mainly focused on generating individual short arguments, while research on generating long and coherent argumentative essays is still under-explored.In this paper, we propose a new task, Argumentative Essay Generation (AEG).Given a writing prompt, the goal of AEG is to automatically generate an argumentative essay with strong persuasiveness.We construct a large-scale dataset, ArgEssay, for this new task and establish a strong model based on a dual-decoder Transformer architecture.Our proposed model contains two decoders, a planning decoder (PD) and a writing decoder (WD), where PD is used to generate a sequence for essay content planning and WD incorporates the planning information to write an essay.Further, we pre-train this model on a large news dataset to enhance the plan-and-write paradigm.Automatic and human evaluation results show that our model can generate more coherent and persuasive essays with higher diversity and less repetition compared to several baselines.

Argument mining (AM) is a challenging task as it requires recognizing the complex argumentation structures involving multiple subtasks.To handle all subtasks of AM in an end-to-end fashion, previous works generally transform AM into a dependency parsing task.However, such methods largely require complex pre- and post-processing to realize the task transformation.In this paper, we investigate the end-to-end AM task from a novel perspective by proposing a generative framework, in which the expected outputs of AM are framed as a simple target sequence. Then, we employ a pre-trained sequence-to-sequence language model with a constrained pointer mechanism (CPM) to model the clues for all the subtasks of AM in the light of the target sequence. Furthermore, we devise a reconstructed positional encoding (RPE) to alleviate the order biases induced by the autoregressive generation paradigm.Experimental results show that our proposed framework achieves new state-of-the-art performance on two AM benchmarks.

Argument pair extraction (APE) aims to extract interactive argument pairs from two passages of a discussion. Previous work studied this task in the context of peer review and rebuttal, and decomposed it into a sequence labeling task and a sentence relation classification task. However, despite the promising performance, such an approach obtains the argument pairs implicitly by the two decomposed tasks, lacking explicitly modeling of the argument-level interactions between argument pairs. In this paper, we tackle the APE task by a mutual guidance framework, which could utilize the information of an argument in one passage to guide the identification of arguments that can form pairs with it in another passage. In this manner, two passages can mutually guide each other in the process of APE. Furthermore, we propose an inter-sentence relation graph to effectively model the inter-relations between two sentences and thus facilitates the extraction of argument pairs. Our proposed method can better represent the holistic argument-level semantics and thus explicitly capture the complex correlations between argument pairs. Experimental results show that our approach significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art model.

The goal of argumentation mining is to automatically extract argumentation structures from argumentative texts. Most existing methods determine argumentative relations by exhaustively enumerating all possible pairs of argument components, which suffer from low efficiency and class imbalance. Moreover, due to the complex nature of argumentation, there is, so far, no universal method that can address both tree and non-tree structured argumentation. Towards these issues, we propose a neural transition-based model for argumentation mining, which incrementally builds an argumentation graph by generating a sequence of actions, avoiding inefficient enumeration operations. Furthermore, our model can handle both tree and non-tree structured argumentation without introducing any structural constraints. Experimental results show that our model achieves the best performance on two public datasets of different structures.

The task of emotion-cause pair extraction deals with finding all emotions and the corresponding causes in unannotated emotion texts. Most recent studies are based on the likelihood of Cartesian product among all clause candidates, resulting in a high computational cost. Targeting this issue, we regard the task as a sequence labeling problem and propose a novel tagging scheme with coding the distance between linked components into the tags, so that emotions and the corresponding causes can be extracted simultaneously. Accordingly, an end-to-end model is presented to process the input texts from left to right, always with linear time complexity, leading to a speed up. Experimental results show that our proposed model achieves the best performance, outperforming the state-of-the-art method by 2.26% (p<0.001) in F1 measure.