Related papers: A Preliminary Report on Probabilistic Attack Norma…
We endow prioritised default logic (PDL) with argumentation semantics using the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation, and prove that the conclusions of the justified arguments are exactly the prioritised default extensions.…
Assumption-based Argumentation (ABA) is a well-established form of structured argumentation. ABA frameworks with an underlying atomic language are widely studied, but their applicability is limited by a representational restriction to…
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) provide a formal setting to analyze many forms of reasoning with conflicting information. While the expressiveness of general infinite AFs make them a tempting tool for modeling many kinds of…
The act of persuasion, a key component in rhetoric argumentation, may be viewed as a dynamics modifier. We extend Dung's frameworks with acts of persuasion among agents, and consider interactions among attack, persuasion and defence that…
In a previous paper the authors applied the Abstract Interpretation approach for approximating the probabilistic semantics of biological systems, modeled specifically using the Chemical Ground Form calculus. The methodology is based on the…
We make three contributions. First, we formulate a discussion-graph semantics for first-order logic with equality, enabling reasoning about discussion and argumentation in AI more generally than before. This addresses the current lack of a…
Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) are one of the most studied formalisms in AI. In this work, we introduce a certain subclass of AFs which we call compact. Given an extension-based semantics, the corresponding compact AFs are…
An abstract argumentation framework can be used to model the argumentative stance of an agent at a high level of abstraction, by indicating for every pair of arguments that is being considered in a debate whether the first attacks the…
Formal argumentation is being used increasingly in artificial intelligence as an effective and understandable way to model potentially conflicting pieces of information, called arguments, and identify so-called acceptable arguments…
This paper develops the model theory of normal modal logics based on partial "possibilities" instead of total "worlds," following Humberstone (1981) instead of Kripke (1963). Possibility semantics can be seen as extending to modal logic the…
As deep neural models in NLP become more complex, and as a consequence opaque, the necessity to interpret them becomes greater. A burgeoning interest has emerged in rationalizing explanations to provide short and coherent justifications for…
We introduce matrix and its block to the Dung's theory of argumentation framework. It is showed that each argumentation framework has a matrix representation, and the indirect attack relation and indirect defence relation can be…
In formal argumentation, a distinction can be made between extension-based semantics, where sets of arguments are either (jointly) accepted or not, and ranking-based semantics, where grades of acceptability are assigned to arguments.…
We argue for a compositional semantics grounded in a strongly typed ontology that reflects our commonsense view of the world and the way we talk about it. Assuming such a structure we show that the semantics of various natural language…
Within the area of computational models of argumentation, the instantiation-based approach is gaining more and more attention, not at least because meaningful input for Dung's abstract frameworks is provided in that way. In a nutshell, the…
In this paper we propose a general approach to define a many-valued preferential interpretation of gradual argumentation semantics. The approach allows for conditional reasoning over arguments and boolean combination of arguments, with…
The issue of representing attacks to attacks in argumentation is receiving an increasing attention as a useful conceptual modelling tool in several contexts. In this paper we present AFRA, a formalism encompassing unlimited recursive…
We study instantiated abstract argumentation frames of the form $(S,R,I)$, where $(S,R)$ is an abstract argumentation frame and where the arguments $x$ of $S$ are instantiated by $I(x)$ as well formed formulas of a well known logic, for…
Automated decision making is often complicated by the complexity of the knowledge involved. Much of this complexity arises from the context sensitive variations of the underlying phenomena. We propose a framework for representing…
In argumentative discourse, persuasion is often achieved by refuting or attacking others arguments. Attacking is not always straightforward and often comprise complex rhetorical moves such that arguers might agree with a logic of an…