Live data from Hacker News

Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

argdown.org

21–30 of 50 posts

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#21
Mapping different viewpoints to combat disinformation or create better policies is key in this age. I'd wish to see a better integration with cognitive psychology and it's overview of biases, also in relation to personal insecurities, trauma and with agogy and education, like The Evidence Toolkit.

A short overview of the Argumentation theory and tooling field:

“Within computer science, the ArgMAS workshop series (Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems), the CMNA workshop series,[34] and the COMMA Conference, are regular annual events attracting participants from every continent. The journal Argument & Computation is dedicated to exploring the intersection between argumentation and computer science. ArgMining is a workshop series dedicated specifically to the related argument mining task. Data from the collaborative structured online argumentation platform Kialo has been used to train and to evaluate natural language processing AI systems such as, most commonly, BERT and its variants.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_theory

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_technology

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_framework

Sibling tooling (with help from Sonnet and Wikipedia):

1. Argument Interchange Format (AIF): This is a standardized format for representing argumentative structures in a machine-readable way. It's used in various academic tools and research projects. 2006

2. Rationale: A software tool developed for academic use, particularly in teaching critical thinking and argument analysis. It offers more structured mapping capabilities than Kialo. 2004

3. Araucaria: An open-source argument mapping software developed by researchers at the University of Dundee. It's designed for analyzing and diagramming arguments. 2001

4. ArgDown: A markdown-like language for creating argument maps, which can be useful for programmatic approaches to argument analysis. 2016

5. OVA (Online Visualization of Argument): A web-based tool for argument analysis and visualization, developed by researchers at the University of Dundee. 2010

6. Argunet: An open-source argument mapping software that allows for collaborative work and integrates with a database of arguments. 2007

7. AGORA-net: A web-based platform for argument reconstruction and evaluation, used in academic settings. 2013

8. Kialo 2017 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kialo

9. ADA tools. Gregor Betz (2022). "Natural-Language Multi-Agent Simulations of Argumentative Opinion Dynamics". Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation. 25: 2. arXiv:2104.06737. doi:10.18564/jasss.4725. S2CID 233231231 https://www.gregorbetz.de/

10. Argument Analytics http://analytics.arg.tech/

11. IBM's Grand Challenge, Project Debater 2011- Published in Nature in March 2021 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Debater

12. German research funder, DFG's nationwide research programme on Robust Argumentation Machines, RATIO. 2019 https://spp-ratio.de/

13. UK nationwide deployment of The Evidence Toolkit by the BBC. 2019 https://www.bbc.co.uk/teach/young-reporter/articles/z6v3hcw

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#22

Seems like you could train an LLM to read an op-ed and output the arguments in this form. Could be fun.

Just call an API and supply the JSON schema.

Though I doubt that arguments in this restricted form are more expressive than the original representation.

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#23
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

checkout http://docopt.org then

That seems to be an abandoned project

Yes, according to the archived Rust implmentation[1] which in turn refers you to either clap[2] or structopt[3]. Other implmentations does not mention this but those I looked at had not been touched for years. Either very stable or unmaintained. Unfortunately the latter according to the Rust crate. The dotNet implmentation had a very small version bump in the dependencies but the rest of the project does not seem to have been touched the past 2 years.

[1] https://github.com/docopt/docopt.rs

[2] https://docs.rs/clap/latest/clap/

[3] https://docs.rs/structopt/latest/structopt/

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#25

There was a website called (I believe) Arguman (way) in the past, that used this kind of thing. It allowed everyone to add arguments, rebuttals, such a thing, and up/downvote them. Last time I looked at it, it was down (still on wayback, but it was a webapp, so it never really loads anything). Edit: it's... "up", but suddenly Turkish and broken: https://arguman.org

https://kialo.com also works this way

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#26

Seems like you could train an LLM to read an op-ed and output the arguments in this form. Could be fun.

Yes, it works really well in my experience. Although I mostly use it for technical information and justifying some decisions. But you can totally ask modern LLMs to "summarise this in ArgDown format" and they'll do the right thing.

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#28
post #8

I tried writing diary entries in argdown for a while. It was fun having this big visual map of all my thoughts on everything, especially when I reused premises a lot. It wasn't particularly useful though.

You noticed reusing premises, potentially reinforcing your choices. You also took time to analyse and write down your thoughts. I think it was useful in some ways even if you didn't use the output afterwards.

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#29
These argdown ligatures are nifty. I also really like Unicode logic symbols because they make annotation and expressions readable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logic_symbols

These can be especially helpful for Causal Analysis based on System Theory (CAST) which is similar to root cause analysis plus uses more logical dependencies.

Re: Argdown, like Markdown for argument mapping

#30
Is there some reason this is all focused around yes/no questions or a single statement? Is it like a standard format that all topics can be reworded to?

I'm wondering if this could this be used for something like comparing alternatives to solve a problem. In that case I'd expect the root to be a description of the problem, then alternatives, then pros-cons for those alternatives.

I'd never heard of this at all before despite searching, so I imagine there's a lot I don't know.

Post reply on HN