Related papers: Graduality in Argumentation
The assessment of argument quality depends on well-established logical, rhetorical, and dialectical properties that are unavoidably subjective: multiple valid assessments may exist, there is no unequivocal ground truth. This aligns with…
Different constructions in the recursion theory use the so-called priority arguments. A general scheme was suggested by A.~Lachlan. Based on his work, we define the notion of a priority-closed class of requirements. Then, for a specific…
Autonomous agents are supposed to be able to finish tasks or achieve goals that are assigned by their users through performing a sequence of actions. Since there might exist multiple plans that an agent can follow and each plan might…
Humans currently use arguments for explaining choices which are already made, or for evaluating potential choices. Each potential choice has usually pros and cons of various strengths. In spite of the usefulness of arguments in a decision…
The rationalizability concept was introduced in \cite{Ber84} and \cite{Pea84} to assess what can be inferred by rational players in a non-cooperative game in the presence of common knowledge. However, this notion can be defined in a number…
Debating over conflicting issues is a necessary first step towards resolving conflicts. However, intrinsic perspectives of an arguer are difficult to overcome by persuasive argumentation skills. Proceeding from a debate to a deliberative…
A key distinguishing feature of conversational recommender systems over traditional recommender systems is their ability to elicit user preferences using natural language. Currently, the predominant approach to preference elicitation is to…
Peer reviewing is a central process in modern research and essential for ensuring high quality and reliability of published work. At the same time, it is a time-consuming process and increasing interest in emerging fields often results in a…
In this article, we are interested in the annotation of transcriptions of human-human dialogue taken from meeting records. We first propose a meeting content model where conversational acts are interpreted with respect to their…
From an inconsistent database non-trivial arguments may be constructed both for a proposition, and for the contrary of that proposition. Therefore, inconsistency in a logical database causes uncertainty about which conclusions to accept.…
Mediation is a process, in which both parties agree to resolve their dispute by negotiating over alternative solutions presented by a mediator. In order to construct such solutions, mediation brings more information and knowledge, and, if…
An extension of an abstract argumentation framework, called collective argumentation, is introduced in which the attack relation is defined directly among sets of arguments. The extension turns out to be suitable, in particular, for…
We consider settings where an uninformed principal must hear arguments from two better-informed agents, corresponding to two possible courses of action that they argue for. The arguments are verifiable in the sense that the true state of…
We present an approach for representing abstract argumentation frameworks based on an encoding into classical higher-order logic. This provides a uniform framework for computer-assisted assessment of abstract argumentation frameworks using…
Evaluating argument strength in quantitative argumentation systems has received increasing attention in the field of abstract argumentation. The concept of acceptability degree is widely adopted in gradual semantics, however, it may not be…
Most of the existing work that focus on the identification of implicit knowledge in arguments generally represent implicit knowledge in the form of commonsense or factual knowledge. However, such knowledge is not sufficient to understand…
Online discussion platforms are a vital part of the public discourse in a deliberative democracy. However, how to interpret the outcomes of the discussions on these platforms is often unclear. In this paper, we propose a novel and…
We introduce a scalable Bayesian preference learning method for identifying convincing arguments in the absence of gold-standard rat- ings or rankings. In contrast to previous work, we avoid the need for separate methods to perform quality…
The combination of argumentation and probability paves the way to new accounts of qualitative and quantitative uncertainty, thereby offering new theoretical and applicative opportunities. Due to a variety of interests, probabilistic…
Sequential propositional logic deviates from ordinary propositional logic by taking into account that during the sequential evaluation of a propositional statement,atomic propositions may yield different Boolean values at repeated…