Introduction
The corpus of arguments from thesis and research proposals (CATyPI) is composed of 444 sections; each section has annotated argumentative paragraphs, argumentative components, and relations. The writings come from Coltypi collection of theses (Gonzalez-Lopez and Lopez-Lopez, 2015). The collection has 468 theses and research proposals in the computer and information technologies domain, in Spanish. The texts are from undergraduate (TSU and Bachelor Degree) and graduate level (M. Sc. and Ph.D.). In particular, our study focuses on the sections of the problem statement, justification, and conclusions. These sections are considered highly argumentative (Lopez and Garcia, 2003).
The CATyPI corpus is created to identify the argumentative characteristics in academic writings of undergraduates and graduate level. The corpus had been used to detect paragraphs with arguments, assessment of justification sections and argument component identification.
Annotation process
We performed the annotation of 444 sections with two instructors who have experience reviewing theses, following the annotation guide. For the annotation process, we have designed first, a guide for argument annotation. We consider two argument components: premises and conclusions, as well as two types of relations between components: support and attack. In our annotation guide, we described different argumentative structures with their argument components (conclusion/premise) and their relations (attack/support). We also include types of arguments and a score to establish the level of an argument. Moreover, a set of examples taken from academic theses is included to support the annotator. Finally, at the end of the guide, we present the annotation procedure.
Download: https://ccc.inaoep.mx/~jesusmiguelgarcia/corpus_ext2018/corpus_eng.php
Cite
Jesús Miguel García-Gorrostieta, Aurelio López-López, Antonio Rico-Sulayes, Maya Carrillo, Argument corpus development and argument component classification: A study in academic Spanish, Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, Volume 36, Issue 2, June 2021, Pages 287–306, https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqaa020 https://academic.oup.com/dsh/article-abstract/36/2/287/5847950