Argument Reconstruction System Based on Large Language Models: From Natural Language to Argument Graphs

The research team proposes an end-to-end system based on large language models that can automatically reconstruct arguments from natural language texts into structured argument graphs. This system achieves the transformation through a multi-stage pipeline and has its effectiveness verified using argumentation theory textbooks and benchmark datasets, providing a new technical path for argument mining and reasoning analysis.

Argument reconstruction is the process of extracting argument components (premises, conclusions) and logical relationships (support, attack) from unstructured texts, facing four major challenges:

1. Implicitness: Argument relationships often lack explicit connectives;
2. Complexity: Multiple premises supporting a conclusion or vice versa form complex networks;
3. Diversity: Argument styles vary greatly across different fields/authors;
4. Subjectivity: Ambiguity exists in structural interpretation. Nevertheless, its application value is significant, applicable to fields such as legal text analysis, policy debate evaluation, scientific paper review, and social media public opinion analysis.

The system adopts a multi-stage pipeline design:

1. Argument Component Identification: Classify text elements into premises (reasons supporting conclusions) or conclusions (claims being supported/attacked), handling both indicator-word and non-indicator-word arguments;
2. Element Filtering and Association: Exclude irrelevant statements, focus on core argument elements, and establish associations;
3. Logical Relationship Discovery: Identify three types of relationships (support, attack, undercut), drawing on formal argumentation theory; The final output is a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG), where nodes represent components and edges represent logical relationships, reflecting the global argument structure.

The study uses two types of experiments to verify the system:

1. Human Evaluation: Test using argumentation theory textbooks, with experts evaluating structure recovery accuracy and relationship identification accuracy;
2. Quantitative Evaluation: Compare with existing methods on benchmark datasets, adapting to different annotation schemes to ensure fairness. Results show: The system has good structure recovery ability, strong cross-dataset adaptability, and is more flexible than traditional methods; however, it has limitations (insufficient deep reasoning, weak ambiguity handling, difficulty in recovering global structure of long texts).

Reasons why LLMs are suitable for argument reconstruction:

• Pre-trained knowledge: Implicitly learns a large number of argument patterns;
• Context understanding: Transformers capture cross-sentence relationships;
• Generation ability: Outputs structured graphs;
• Few-shot learning: Quickly adapts to new styles/fields. Application prospects include legal analysis, policy evaluation, scientific review, educational assistance, public opinion monitoring, etc.

Future research directions include:

1. Argument quality evaluation: Assess argument strength and premise reliability;
2. Argument generation: Generate natural language texts based on graphs;
3. Multilingual expansion: Support multiple languages;
4. Real-time processing: Optimize efficiency to support large-scale streaming texts;
5. Interactive editing: Human-machine collaboration to correct reconstruction results.

The LLM-based argument reconstruction system demonstrates AI's potential to understand human reasoning, transforming unstructured texts into formalized graphs and opening new paths for argument mining, reasoning analysis, and critical thinking education. As the system improves, AI is expected to participate more deeply in human knowledge exchange and rational dialogue.