Demonstrates enhanced argument and stance detection models, suggesting improvements in reproducibility and cost.
We propose a modular, retrieval-augmented pipeline for computational argumentation that integrates two complementary components: ArgStance, a multi-task model for argument and stance reasoning, and TargetMatch, a contrastive retrieval model that treats target identification as a first-class retrieval task. We further formulate stance detection as a framing-aware problem, recognizing that the polarity of a stance toward a target depends on how the proposition is framed. To support broad generalization, we construct a large dataset spanning Kialo discussions, Wikipedia, and curated news articles, and introduce a cross-source injection strategy that mitigates domain and style biases. Our compact models achieve F1 scores of 0.94 for argument detection (ModernBERT-base) and 0.84 for same-side stance detection (ModernBERT-large), while TargetMatch attains a top-10 retrieval accuracy of 0.75. Under controlled zero-shot comparisons with large language models, our models remain competitive while offering advantages in reproducibility, deployment cost, and controllable intermediate predictions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Charalampous et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: