Groza, T.; Handschuh, S.; Clark, T.; Buckingham Shum, S. and de Waard, A.
PDF (Accepted Manuscript)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
With the advancement of technology and the wide adoption of ontologies as knowledge representation formats, in the last decade, a handful of models were proposed for the externalization of the rhetoric and argumentation captured within scientific publications. Conceptually, most of these models share a similar representation form of the scientific publication, i.e. as a series of interconnected elementary knowledge items. The main differences are given by the terminology used, the types of rhetorical and/or argumentation relations connecting the knowledge items and the foundational theories supporting these relations. This paper analyzes the state of the art and provides a concise comparative overview of the ﬁve most prominent discourse representation models, with the goal of sketching an uniﬁed model for discourse representation.
|Item Type:||Conference Item|
|Copyright Holders:||2009 The Authors|
|Keywords:||scientific discourse; semantic web; pragmatic web; science publishing; argumentation tools;|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Knowledge Media Institute|
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Centre for Research in Computing (CRC)|
|Depositing User:||Simon Buckingham Shum|
|Date Deposited:||21 Oct 2009 12:45|
|Last Modified:||28 Mar 2016 09:59|
|Share this page:|
► Automated document suggestions from open access sources
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.