EMNLP 2025

November 08, 2025

Suzhou, China

Would you like to see your presentation here, made available to a global audience of researchers?
Add your own presentation or have us affordably record your next conference.

Annotated data is essential for most NLP tasks, but creating it can be time-consuming and challenging. Argumentation annotation is especially complex, often resulting in moderate human agreement. While large language models (LLMs) have excelled in increasingly complex tasks, their application to argumentation annotation has been limited. This paper investigates how well GPT-4o and Claude can annotate three types of argumentation in Swedish data compared to human annotators. Using full annotation guidelines, we evaluate the models on argumentation schemes, argumentative spans, and attitude annotation. Both models perform similarly to humans across all tasks, with Claude showing better human agreement than GPT-4o. Agreement between models is higher than human agreement in argumentation scheme and span annotation.

Downloads

PaperTranscript English (automatic)

Next from EMNLP 2025

Modeling Language Learning in Corrective Feedback Interactions
workshop paper

Modeling Language Learning in Corrective Feedback Interactions

EMNLP 2025

Parisa Kordjamshidi
Juan Luis Castro-Garcia and 1 other author

08 November 2025

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

Select topic of interest (you can select more than one)

PRESENTATIONS

  • All Presentations
  • For Librarians
  • Resource Center
  • Free Trial
Underline Science, Inc.
1216 Broadway, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

© 2026 Underline - All rights reserved