A Multi-persona Framework for Argument Quality Assessment

Abstract

Argument quality assessment faces inherent challenges due to its subjective nature, where different evaluators may assign varying quality scores for an argument based on personal perspectives. Although existing datasets collect opinions from multiple annotators to model subjectivity, most existing computational methods fail to consider multi-perspective evaluation. To address this issue, we propose MPAQ, a multi-persona framework for argument quality assessment that simulates diverse evaluator perspectives through large language models. It first dynamically generates targeted personas tailored to an input argument, then simulates each persona’s reasoning process to evaluate the argument quality from multiple perspectives. To effectively generate fine-grained quality scores, we develop a coarse-to-fine scoring strategy that first generates a coarse-grained integer score and then refines it into a fine-grained decimal score. Experiments on IBM-Rank-30k and IBM-ArgQ-5.3kArgs datasets demonstrate that MPAQ consistently outperforms strong baselines while providing comprehensive multi-perspective rationales.