Structure-Preserving Document-Level Data Augmentation via Discourse Parsing
Organizations: Shenzhen University, China · Shenzhen Technology University, China
Abstract
Data augmentation (DA) plays a vital role in improving model performance in low-resource or limited-supervision scenarios within Natural Language Processing (NLP). Existing DA methods, such as synonym replacement and back-translation, have demonstrated effectiveness on the word or sentence level; however, they frequently neglect discourse-level coherence and logical flow, which are essential for complex tasks dependent on inter-sentential relationships. In this paper, we propose a structure-preserving document-level data augmentation framework based on large language models (LLMs) and document-level discourse structure parsing. Our approach identifies rhetorical relations between sentence pairs and extracts key phrases, which are then replaced with semantically coherent but topically shifted content while preserving the original discourse structure. Experimental results on text summarization and question answering show that the proposed augmented data provides complementary supervision and improves combined-data training across the evaluated tasks. Comparisons with a standard RST parser and controlled ablations further support the proposed discourse representation.
Figures & tables
| Training Configuration | Chinese Abstractive Corpus | Newsroom | IndoSum | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | R1 | R2 | RL | B | R1 | R2 | RL | B | R1 | R2 | RL | |
| Reference Settings | ||||||||||||
| Zero-shot LLM 4 | 0.139 | 0.290 | 0.193 | 0.265 | 0.267 | 0.401 | 0.290 | 0.364 | 0.151 | 0.290 | 0.248 | 0.273 |
| Inp | 0.249 | 0.391 | 0.312 | 0.372 | 0.634 | 0.697 | 0.657 | 0.686 | 0.728 | 0.749 | 0.741 | 0.747 |
| Con | 0.228 | 0.370 | 0.289 | 0.351 | 0.653 | 0.712 | 0.676 | 0.703 | 0.746 | 0.765 | 0.756 | 0.763 |
| Inp+Con | 0.269 | 0.392 | 0.318 | 0.376 | 0.686 | 0.741 | 0.709 | 0.733 | 0.757 | 0.783 | 0.776 | 0.782 |
| Training Configuration | SQuAD | JaQuAD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EM | F1 | EM | F1 | |
| Reference Settings | ||||
| Zero-shot LLM 4 | 0.636 | 0.791 | 0.659 | 0.773 |
| Inp | 0.708 | 0.780 | 0.547 | 0.713 |
| Con | 0.690 | 0.742 | 0.598 | 0.743 |
| Inp+Con | 0.697 | 0.746 | 0.681 | 0.729 |
| Method | Configuration | Chinese Abstractive Corpus | Newsroom | SQuAD | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLEU | R1 | R2 | RL | BLEU | R1 | R2 | RL | EM | F1 | ||
| Proposed method | |||||||||||
| Full method | Aug | 0.247 | 0.383 | 0.304 | 0.360 | 0.639 | 0.696 | 0.658 | 0.686 | 0.698 | 0.740 |
| Inp+Aug | 0.269 | 0.395 | 0.319 | 0.379 | 0.775 | 0.796 | 0.765 | 0.787 | 0.701 | 0.751 | |
| Inp+Con+Aug | 0.276 | 0.417 | 0.343 | 0.400 | 0.780 | 0.789 | 0.757 | 0.780 | 0.731 | 0.779 | |
| Comparison with UniRST | |||||||||||
| Dataset | Training Configuration | BertSum | SimCLS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLEU | R-1 | R-2 | R-L | BLEU | R-1 | R-2 | R-L | ||
| Chinese Abstractive Corpus | Inp | 0.430 | 0.515 | 0.462 | 0.502 | 0.439 | 0.522 | 0.466 | 0.507 |
| Con | 0.411 | 0.497 | 0.440 | 0.482 | 0.423 | 0.507 | 0.450 | 0.492 | |
| Aug | 0.415 | 0.496 | 0.445 | 0.484 | 0.439 | 0.517 | 0.463 | 0.503 | |
| Inp+Con | 0.422 | 0.505 | 0.452 | 0.492 | 0.424 | 0.509 | 0.453 | 0.493 | |
| Inp+Aug | 0.422 | 0.508 | 0.451 | 0.493 | 0.431 | 0.516 | 0.458 | 0.501 | |
| Training Configuration | RoBERTa | ELECTRA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EM | F1 | EM | F1 | |
| Inp | 0.611 | 0.748 | 0.618 | 0.749 |
| Con | 0.620 | 0.762 | 0.602 | 0.750 |
| Aug | 0.625 | 0.748 | 0.609 | 0.751 |
| Inp+Con | 0.633 | 0.775 | 0.624 | 0.775 |
| Inp+Aug | 0.621 | 0.761 | 0.627 | 0.762 |
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Target category | Source relations mapped to this category |
|---|---|
| Causality & Condition | Coarse relation families: Cause, Condition, and Enablement. Source relation labels: causal-cause , causal-result , contingency-condition , purpose-attribute , and purpose-goal . |
| Contrast & Transition | Coarse relation families: Comparison, Contrast, and Topic-Change. Source relation labels: adversative-antithesis , adversative-concession , and adversative-contrast . |
| Coordination & Sequence | Coarse relation families: Joint and Temporal. Source relation labels: joint-list , joint-disjunction , joint-sequence , and joint-other . |
| Explanation & Clarification | Coarse relation families: Attribution, Background, Elaboration, Explanation, Manner-Means, and Topic-Comment. Source relation labels: attribution-positive , attribution-negative , context-background , context-circumstance , elaboration-additional , elaboration-attribute , explanation-evidence , explanation-justify , explanation-motivation , mode-manner , mode-means , topic-question , and topic-solutionhood . |
| Summary & Generalization | Coarse relation families: Evaluation and Summary. Source relation labels: evaluation-comment , restatement-partial , and restatement-repetition . |
| Continuation & Expansion | Coarse relation families: Textual Organization, Same-Unit, Span, and other structural relations. Source relation labels: organization-heading , organization-phatic , organization-preparation , same-unit , and other unmatched structural labels. |
Data Augmentation
Data augmentation expands or transforms training examples to improve learning, data efficiency, and robustness to distribution shifts.
See all 249 papers