journal article·2026-01-31Open access

KFF-Transformer: A Human–AI Collaborative Framework for Fine-Grained Argument Element Identification

Xuxun Cai, Jincai Yang, Meng Zheng, Jianping Zhu

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 3

Abstract

With the rapid development of intelligent computing and artificial intelligence, there is an increasing demand for efficient, interpretable, and interactive frameworks for fine-grained text analysis. In the field of argument mining, existing approaches are often constrained by sentence-level processing, limited exploitation of key linguistic markers, and a lack of human–AI collaborative mechanisms, which restrict both recognition accuracy and computational efficiency. To address these challenges, this paper proposes KFF-Transformer, a computing-oriented human–AI collaborative framework for fine-grained argument element identification based on Toulmin’s model. The framework first employs an automatic key marker mining algorithm to expand a seed set of expert-labeled linguistic cues, significantly enhancing coverage and diversity. It then employs a lightweight deep learning architecture that combines BERT for contextual token encoding with a BiLSTM network enhanced by an attention mechanism to perform word-level classification of the six Toulmin elements. This approach leverages enriched key markers as critical features, enhancing both accuracy and interpretability. It should be noted that while our framework leverages BERT—a Transformer-based encoder—for contextual representation, the core sequence labeling module is based on BiLSTM and does not implement a standard Transformer block. Furthermore, a human-in-the-loop interaction mechanism is embedded to support real-time user correction and adaptive system refinement, improving robustness and practical usability. Experiments conducted on a dataset of 180 English argumentative essays demonstrate that KFF-Transformer identifies key markers in 1145 sentences and achieves an accuracy of 72.2% and an F1-score of 66.7%, outperforming a strong baseline by 3.7% and 2.8%, respectively. Moreover, the framework reduces processing time by 18.9% on CPU and achieves near-real-time performance of approximately 3.3 s on GPU. These results validate that KFF-Transformer effectively integrates linguistically grounded reasoning, efficient deep learning, and interactive design, providing a scalable and trustworthy solution for intelligent argument analysis in real-world educational applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Topic Modeling · Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining · Natural Language Processing Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Faculty of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China

School of Computer Science, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China

School of Computer Science and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China

References (41)

Show source-provided references
1. Hall, E., Seyam, M., and Dunlap, D. (2024). Exploring explainability and transparency in automated essay scoring systems: A user-centered evaluation. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Springer Nature.10.1007/978-3-031-61691-4_18 ↗
2. In smart classroom: Investigating the relationship between human-computer interaction, cognitive load and academic emotion10.1080/10447318.2023.2190257 ↗
3. A human-computer interaction system for teacher-student interaction modeling using machine learning10.1080/10447318.2022.2115645 ↗
4. Toala, R., Durães, D., and Novais, P. (2019, January 13–15). Human-computer interaction in intelligent tutoring systems. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, Beijing, China.10.1007/978-3-030-23887-2_7 ↗
5. Toulmin, S.E. (2003). The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511840005 ↗
6. Cognitive load theory and educational technology10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3 ↗
7. Anderson, J.R. (2013). The Adaptive Character of Thought, Psychology Press.10.4324/9780203771730 ↗
8. Evaluating the effectiveness of human-centered AI systems in education
9. Bannò, S., and Matassoni, M. (2022, January 15). Cross-corpora experiments of automatic proficiency assessment and error detection for spoken English. Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educ. Applications (BEA 2022), Online.10.18653/v1/2022.bea-1.12 ↗
10. Human-AI collaborative feedback for improving EFL writing performance: An analysis based on natural language processing
11. Computer-supported cooperative work: History and focus10.1109/2.291294 ↗
12. Devlin, J., Chang, M., Lee, K., and Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-Training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding, North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. From argument diagrams to argumentation mining in texts: A survey
14. Argumentation, Dialogue Theory, and Probability Modeling: Alternative Frameworks for Argumentation Research in Education10.1080/00461520.2011.558816 ↗
15. Perceiving learning at a glance: A systematic literature review of learning dashboard research10.1109/TLT.2016.2599522 ↗
16. Liu, D. (2022, January 26–28). A new modification to the Toulmin model as an analytical framework for argumentative essays. Proceedings of the International Conference on AI Logic and Applications, Changchun, China.10.1007/978-981-19-7510-3_16 ↗
17. Argument mining: A survey Computational linguistics10.1162/coli_a_00364 ↗
18. Laha, A., and Raykar, V. (2016, January 11–16). An empirical evaluation of various deep learning architectures for bi-sequence classification tasks. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Osaka, Japan.
19. Argumentation mining: Classifying argumentation components with partial tree kernel and support vector machine for constituent trees on imbalanced persuasive essays10.1088/1742-6596/1192/1/012009 ↗
20. Li, M., Gao, Y., Wen, H., Du, Y., Liu, H., and Wang, H. (2017, January 5–8). Joint RNN model for argument component boundary detection. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems Man and Cybernetics (SMC), Banff, AB, Canada.10.1109/SMC.2017.8122578 ↗
21. Bahdanau, D., Cho, K.H., and Bengio, Y. (2015, January 7–9). Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2015), San Diego, CA, USA.
22. Stab, C., and Gurevych, I. (2014, January 25–29). Identifying argumentative discourse structures in persuasive essays. Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), Doha, Qatar.10.3115/v1/D14-1006 ↗
23. Toledo-Ronen, O., Orbach, M., Bilu, Y., Spector, A., and Slonim, N. (2020). Multilingual argument mining: Datasets and analysis. arXiv.10.18653/v1/2020.findings-emnlp.29 ↗
24. Alkhawaldeh, F., Yuan, T., and Kazakov, D.L. (2021, January 27–28). Warrant generation through deep learning. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Natural Language Computing (NATL 2021), London, UK.10.5121/csit.2021.112005 ↗
25. Mirzababaei, B., and Pammer-Schindler, V. (2021). Developing a conversational agent’s capability to identify structural wrongness in arguments based on Toulmin’s model of arguments. Front. Artif. Intell., 4.10.3389/frai.2021.645516 ↗
26. Yang, J., Zheng, M., and Liu, Y. (2023). Fusion weighted features and BiLSTM-attention model for argument mining of EFL writing. Front. Psych., 14.10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1049266 ↗
27. Argument mining-driven analysis of peer reviews
28. Kim, D., Lee, S., and Park, C. (2023). Development of an automated approach to acquiring static street view images using a Vision Transformer for building façade analysis. Sensors, 23.
29. Evaluating cross-building transferability of attention-based automated fault detection and diagnosis for air handling units: Auditorium and hospital case studies
30. A statistical approach to mechanized encoding and searching of literary information10.1147/rd.14.0309 ↗
31. Mihalcea, R., and Tarau, P. (2004, January 25–26). TextRank: Bringing order into text. Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Barcelona, Spain.
32. Machine learning-based keyphrase extraction: Comparing decision trees, naïve Bayes, and artificial neural networks10.3745/JIPS.2012.8.4.693 ↗
33. Guleria, A., Sood, R., and Singh, P. (2021). Automatic keyphrase extraction using SVM. Advances in Communication and Computational Technology: Select Proceedings of ICACCT 2019, Springer.10.1007/978-981-15-5341-7_71 ↗
34. Li, S., Jiang, T., and Zhang, Y. (2024, January 24–28). A phrase-level attention-enhanced CRF for keyphrase extraction. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Retrieval, Glasgow, Scotland.10.1007/978-3-031-56027-9_28 ↗
35. Keyword extraction for journals based on part-of-speech and BiLSTM-CRF combined model
36. Sun, S., Liu, Z., Xiong, C., Liu, Z., and Bao, J. (2021, January 13–17). Capturing global informativeness in open-domain keyphrase extraction. Proceedings of the 10th CCF International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Chinese Computing (NLPCC 2021), Qingdao, China.10.1007/978-3-030-88483-3_21 ↗
37. Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey10.1109/TPAMI.2023.3275156 ↗
38. Research on traffic sign detection model based on Transformer
39. Horvitz, E. (1999, January 15–20). Principles of mixed-initiative user interfaces. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.10.1145/302979.303030 ↗
40. Parsing argumentation structures in persuasive essays10.1162/COLI_a_00295 ↗
41. Eger, S., Daxenberger, J., and Gurevych, I. (August, January 30). Neural End-to-End Learning for Computational Argumentation Mining. Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2017), Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.18653/v1/P17-1002 ↗