Computer-based method and system of analyzing, editing and improving content

Abstract

A method for providing proposition-based content for review within a collaborative environment includes representing a set of propositional content available for an argument within a user interface provided via one or more client systems as a plurality of statement elements that are each one of a plurality of statement types that include premise, warrant, and claim, constructing a logical argument object for the argument based on input defining the argument to include one or more premises.

1 . (canceled) 
     
     
         2 . A method for computerized dialogue interactivity, the method comprising:
 receiving a string that includes a plurality of words;   analyzing the string using a language model to associate a plurality of different components of the string with respective logical types, wherein each of the plurality of different components includes a respective subset of the plurality of words, wherein the plurality of different components include a first component that belongs to a first logical type and a second component that belongs to a second logical type;   generating feedback data based on the string, wherein the feedback data is generated based on consideration of the first component as belonging to the first logical type and consideration of the second component as belonging to the second logical type; and   outputting the feedback data through an interface.   
     
     
         3 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the first logical type is associated with at least one of an opinion, an argument, a conclusion, a sub-claim, a statement, or a reference; and
 wherein the second logical type is associated with a fact corresponding to the opinion, a rationale corresponding to the argument, a premise corresponding to the conclusion, a claim corresponding to the sub-claim, a credential corresponding to the statement, or a citation corresponding to the reference.   
     
     
         4 . The method of  claim 3 , further comprising:
 identifying that an instance of the first logical type represented in the first component has support from an instance of the second logical type represented in the second component, wherein the feedback data is indicative of the instance of the first logical type having support from the instance of the second logical type.   
     
     
         5 . The method of  claim 3 , further comprising:
 identifying that an instance of the first logical type represented in the first component lacks support from an instance of the second logical type represented in the second component, wherein the feedback data is indicative of the instance of the first logical type lacking support from the instance of the second logical type.   
     
     
         6 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the first logical type is associated with at least one of a counterpoint, a critique, or a rebuttal; and
 wherein the second logical type is associated with a point corresponding to the counterpoint, an assertion corresponding to the critique, or an argument corresponding to the rebuttal.   
     
     
         7 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the first logical type is associated with at least one of an argument, a fact, an opinion, a claim, a premise, a point, a counterpoint, a conclusion, a proposition, a rationale, a basis, a citation, a reference, a statement, a hypothetical, a question, a rebuttal, a critique, a review, a qualifier, a warrant, a dependency, a probability, a hypothetical, an evidence element, an alternative, or a contingency. 
     
     
         8 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the string includes a conversation between a first user and a second user, wherein the first component is associated with the first user, and wherein the second component is associated with the second user. 
     
     
         9 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the string is associated with at least one user, and wherein analyzing the string using the language model includes analyzing the string using the language model based on a user interaction history associated with the at least one user. 
     
     
         10 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the feedback data includes at least one of a summary of the string or a rebuttal of at least one of the plurality of different components of the string. 
     
     
         11 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein receiving the string includes receiving the string through the interface. 
     
     
         12 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the interface is a chat interface. 
     
     
         13 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the feedback data is based on a map that maps the plurality of different components of the string to a plurality of logical types, the plurality of logical types including at least the first logical type and the second logical type. 
     
     
         14 . The method of  claim 2 , further comprising:
 updating the language model based on the feedback data.   
     
     
         15 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein generating the feedback data based on the string is also based on use of the language model. 
     
     
         16 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the first logical type is associated with at least one of a fact being contradicted, an argument by analogy, a category mismatch, a principle being violated, a solution being proposed, a consequence being asserted, a normative evaluation, an outcome different from intent, a topic shift, a topic split, a non-sequitur, a question of degree, a confusion of subject agency, a confusion of affected parties, an assignment of burden of proof, a question begging, circular reasoning, a contradiction, or a set incompleteness. 
     
     
         17 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein receiving the string includes receiving audio and processing the audio to generate the string. 
     
     
         18 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein receiving the string includes receiving a file and recognizing the string in the file through optical character recognition. 
     
     
         19 . The method of  claim 2 , wherein the interface is a graphical user interface, and wherein outputting the feedback data through the interface includes displaying the feedback data through the graphical user interface. 
     
     
         20 . A system for computerized dialogue interactivity, the system comprising:
 at least one memory; and   at least one processor, wherein execution of instructions stored in the at least one memory by the at least one processor causes the at least one processor to:
 receive a string that includes a plurality of words; 
 analyze the string using a language model to associate a plurality of different components of the string with respective logical types, wherein each of the plurality of different components includes a respective subset of the plurality of words, wherein the plurality of different components include a first component that belongs to a first logical type and a second component that belongs to a second logical type; 
 generate feedback data based on the string, wherein the feedback data is generated based on consideration of the first component as belonging to the first logical type and consideration of the second component as belonging to the second logical type; and 
 output the feedback data through an interface. 
   
     
     
         21 . The system of  claim 20 , wherein the first logical type is associated with fact, wherein the second logical type is associated with opinion.