Johannes Kiesel

CL
h-index50
7papers
1,638citations
Novelty16%
AI Score29

7 Papers

CLJan 31, 2023
The Touché23-ValueEval Dataset for Identifying Human Values behind Arguments

Nailia Mirzakhmedova, Johannes Kiesel, Milad Alshomary et al. · berkeley

We present the Touché23-ValueEval Dataset for Identifying Human Values behind Arguments. To investigate approaches for the automated detection of human values behind arguments, we collected 9324 arguments from 6 diverse sources, covering religious texts, political discussions, free-text arguments, newspaper editorials, and online democracy platforms. Each argument was annotated by 3 crowdworkers for 54 values. The Touché23-ValueEval dataset extends the Webis-ArgValues-22. In comparison to the previous dataset, the effectiveness of a 1-Baseline decreases, but that of an out-of-the-box BERT model increases. Therefore, though the classification difficulty increased as per the label distribution, the larger dataset allows for training better models.

IRNov 8, 2023
Evaluating Generative Ad Hoc Information Retrieval

Lukas Gienapp, Harrisen Scells, Niklas Deckers et al.

Recent advances in large language models have enabled the development of viable generative retrieval systems. Instead of a traditional document ranking, generative retrieval systems often directly return a grounded generated text as a response to a query. Quantifying the utility of the textual responses is essential for appropriately evaluating such generative ad hoc retrieval. Yet, the established evaluation methodology for ranking-based ad hoc retrieval is not suited for the reliable and reproducible evaluation of generated responses. To lay a foundation for developing new evaluation methods for generative retrieval systems, we survey the relevant literature from the fields of information retrieval and natural language processing, identify search tasks and system architectures in generative retrieval, develop a new user model, and study its operationalization.

IRDec 14, 2022
The Infinite Index: Information Retrieval on Generative Text-To-Image Models

Niklas Deckers, Maik Fröbe, Johannes Kiesel et al.

Conditional generative models such as DALL-E and Stable Diffusion generate images based on a user-defined text, the prompt. Finding and refining prompts that produce a desired image has become the art of prompt engineering. Generative models do not provide a built-in retrieval model for a user's information need expressed through prompts. In light of an extensive literature review, we reframe prompt engineering for generative models as interactive text-based retrieval on a novel kind of "infinite index". We apply these insights for the first time in a case study on image generation for game design with an expert. Finally, we envision how active learning may help to guide the retrieval of generated images.

CLJan 23, 2023
Topic Ontologies for Arguments

Yamen Ajjour, Johannes Kiesel, Benno Stein et al.

Many computational argumentation tasks, like stance classification, are topic-dependent: the effectiveness of approaches to these tasks significantly depends on whether the approaches were trained on arguments from the same topics as those they are tested on. So, which are these topics that researchers train approaches on? This paper contributes the first comprehensive survey of topic coverage, assessing 45 argument corpora. For the assessment, we take the first step towards building an argument topic ontology, consulting three diverse authoritative sources: the World Economic Forum, the Wikipedia list of controversial topics, and Debatepedia. Comparing the topic sets between the authoritative sources and corpora, our analysis shows that the corpora topics-which are mostly those frequently discussed in public online fora - are covered well by the sources. However, other topics from the sources are less extensively covered by the corpora of today, revealing interesting future directions for corpus construction.

CLJun 8, 2025
Manifesto from Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 24352 -- Conversational Agents: A Framework for Evaluation (CAFE)

Christine Bauer, Li Chen, Nicola Ferro et al.

During the workshop, we deeply discussed what CONversational Information ACcess (CONIAC) is and its unique features, proposing a world model abstracting it, and defined the Conversational Agents Framework for Evaluation (CAFE) for the evaluation of CONIAC systems, consisting of six major components: 1) goals of the system's stakeholders, 2) user tasks to be studied in the evaluation, 3) aspects of the users carrying out the tasks, 4) evaluation criteria to be considered, 5) evaluation methodology to be applied, and 6) measures for the quantitative criteria chosen.

IRJan 26, 2022
SCAI-QReCC Shared Task on Conversational Question Answering

Svitlana Vakulenko, Johannes Kiesel, Maik Fröbe

Search-Oriented Conversational AI (SCAI) is an established venue that regularly puts a spotlight upon the recent work advancing the field of conversational search. SCAI'21 was organised as an independent on-line event and featured a shared task on conversational question answering. Since all of the participant teams experimented with answer generation models for this task, we identified evaluation of answer correctness in this settings as the major challenge and a current research gap. Alongside the automatic evaluation, we conducted two crowdsourcing experiments to collect annotations for answer plausibility and faithfulness. As a result of this shared task, the original conversational QA dataset used for evaluation was further extended with alternative correct answers produced by the participant systems.

CLFeb 18, 2017
A Stylometric Inquiry into Hyperpartisan and Fake News

Martin Potthast, Johannes Kiesel, Kevin Reinartz et al.

This paper reports on a writing style analysis of hyperpartisan (i.e., extremely one-sided) news in connection to fake news. It presents a large corpus of 1,627 articles that were manually fact-checked by professional journalists from BuzzFeed. The articles originated from 9 well-known political publishers, 3 each from the mainstream, the hyperpartisan left-wing, and the hyperpartisan right-wing. In sum, the corpus contains 299 fake news, 97% of which originated from hyperpartisan publishers. We propose and demonstrate a new way of assessing style similarity between text categories via Unmasking---a meta-learning approach originally devised for authorship verification---, revealing that the style of left-wing and right-wing news have a lot more in common than any of the two have with the mainstream. Furthermore, we show that hyperpartisan news can be discriminated well by its style from the mainstream (F1=0.78), as can be satire from both (F1=0.81). Unsurprisingly, style-based fake news detection does not live up to scratch (F1=0.46). Nevertheless, the former results are important to implement pre-screening for fake news detectors.