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.

This paper presents the winning system that participated in SemEval-2021 Task 5: Toxic Spans Detection. This task aims to locate those spans that attribute to the text’s toxicity within a text, which is crucial for semi-automated moderation in online discussions. We formalize this task as the Sequence Labeling (SL) problem and the Span Boundary Detection (SBD) problem separately and employ three state-of-the-art models. Next, we integrate predictions of these models to produce a more credible and complement result. Our system achieves a char-level score of 70.83%, ranking 1/91. In addition, we also explore the lexicon-based method, which is strongly interpretable and flexible in practice.