ValNov Subtask A Benchmark (ValNov)

8 rows 7 with code listed 3 metrics Dataset page

Given a textual premise and conclusion candidate, the Argument-Validity-and-Novelty-Prediction-Shared-Task ValNov consists in predicting two aspects of a conclusion: its validity and novelty.

Validity is defined as the degree to which the conclusion is justified with respect to the given premise. A conclusion is considered to be valid if it is supported by inferences that link the premise to the conclusion, based on logical principles or commonsense or world knowledge, which may be defeasible. A conclusion will be trivially considered valid if it repeats or summarizes the premise – in which case it can hardly be considered as novel.

Novelty defines the degree to which the conclusion contains content that is new in relation to the premise. As extreme cases, a conclusion candidate that repeats or summarizes the premise or is unrelated to the premise will not be considered novel.

The archive carries no text for this table; the description above is the archive's text for the task ValNov. archive 2025-07-28

Over time archive 2025-07-28

Metric Extra training data

The chart needs JavaScript; the table below carries every value.

Direction inferred from the metric name, not from the archive: JOINT-F1 (higher is better), VAL-F1 (higher is better), NOV-F1 (higher is better). Points are placed at the row's paper date; 0 of 8 rows carry one.

Results archive 2025-07-28

Archive rows end at the archive snapshot, 2025-07-28: no result published after that date is in this table. Rank is the archive's row order at that snapshot; not re-ranked here. Metric values are the archive's strings. Column headers sort the table in your browser; each row keeps its archive rank.

						Paper	Code	Ran Syntology	Report
1	CLTeamL-3	45.16	74.64	61.75	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report
2	AXiS@EdUni-1	43.27	69.80	62.43	–	Paper	–	no code linked	report
3	ACCEPT-1	43.13	59.20	70.00	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report
4	CSS	42.40	70.76	59.86	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report
5	System Average	35.94	62.74	52.97	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report
6	NLP@UIT	25.89	61.72	43.36	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report
7	Baseline	23.90	59.96	36.12	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report
8	Harshad	17.35	56.31	39.00	–	Paper	Code	linked, not harvested	report

All 8 rows shown. 8 link to a paper page on this site; 0 are marked as using additional training data in the archive. No GitHub stars are tracked; "Code" is the first repository the archive lists for the row. The archive carries no row tags, review links or community-submitted rows for this table; none are shown. archive 2025-07-28

Syntology Ran reads "N of M ran · U unverified": of the M code samples Syntology harvested from repositories linked to that row's paper (joined by arXiv id), N executed on a synthesized input and the other U = M−N are unverified (harvested, no recorded run). It counts code from repositories linked to that row's paper, not this result: the row's number was not reproduced and nothing here is a correctness claim. The other cell texts mean no graph line for the row: "linked, not harvested" (the archive links code, Syntology has not harvested it), "no code linked" (no code link in the archive), "not matched" (the row's paper URL matched no paper on this site). 0 rows have a graph line, from 0 distinct papers; 0 rows (0 papers) have at least one sample that ran. Counting each paper once: Syntology ran 0 of 0 samples; 0 unverified. Separately, 0 of those 0 are pointer-only (licence): the site points at that code rather than redistributing it, a licence property recorded for ran and unverified samples alike; each cell's tooltip carries the row's own pointer-only count. Read from the graph 2026-09-24. Per-sample status is on the paper page.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections