Related papers: Intrinsic Argument Strength in Structured Argument…
Dung's abstract framework for argumentation enables a study of the interactions between arguments based solely on an ``attack'' binary relation on the set of arguments. Various ways to solve conflicts between contradictory pieces of…
In this paper we show how the defense relation among abstract arguments can be used to encode the reasons for accepting arguments. After introducing a novel notion of defenses and defense graphs, we propose a defense semantics together with…
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…
This paper develops a new approach to computational argumentation that is informed by philosophical and linguistic views. Namely, it takes into account two ideas that have received little attention in the literature on computational…
We present an empirical study aimed at analysing the use of viewpoints in an industrial Concurrent Engineering context. Our focus is on the viewpoints expressed in the argumentative process taking place in evaluation meetings. Our results…
Online debate forums provide users a platform to express their opinions on controversial topics while being exposed to opinions from diverse set of viewpoints. Existing work in Natural Language Processing (NLP) has shown that linguistic…
We present ABA+, a new approach to handling preferences in a well known structured argumentation formalism, Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA). In ABA+, preference information given over assumptions is incorporated directly into the…
Argumentation is a process of evaluating and comparing a set of arguments. A way to compare them consists in using a ranking-based semantics which rank-order arguments from the most to the least acceptable ones. Recently, a number of such…
Argumentation has proved a useful tool in defining formal semantics for assumption-based reasoning by viewing a proof as a process in which proponents and opponents attack each others arguments by undercuts (attack to an argument's premise)…
The study of arguments as abstract entities and their interaction as introduced by Dung (Artificial Intelligence 177, 1995) has become one of the most active research branches within Artificial Intelligence and Reasoning. A main issue for…
We augment Assumption Based Argumentation (ABA for short) with weighted argumentation. In a nutshell, we assign weights to arguments and then derive the weight of attacks between ABA arguments. We illustrate our proposal through running…
We propose a procedure for automated implicit inductive theorem proving for equational specifications made of rewrite rules with conditions and constraints. The constraints are interpreted over constructor terms (representing data values),…
We propose an approach for the structure controllable summarization of long legal opinions that considers the argument structure of the document. Our approach involves using predicted argument role information to guide the model in…
In many expert and everyday reasoning contexts it is very useful to reason on the basis of defeasible assumptions. For instance, if the information at hand is incomplete we often use plausible assumptions, or if the information is…
The matrices and their sub-blocks are introduced into the study of determining various extensions in the sense of Dung's theory of argumentation frameworks. It is showed that each argumentation framework has its matrix representations, and…
The connection between inconsistent databases and Dung's abstract argumentation framework has recently drawn growing interest. Specifically, an inconsistent database, involving certain types of integrity constraints such as functional and…
Detecting persuasion in argumentative text is a challenging task with important implications for understanding human communication. This work investigates the role of persuasion strategies - such as Attack on reputation, Distraction, and…
We study a conservative extension of classical propositional logic distinguishing between four modes of statement: a proposition may be affirmed or denied, and it may be strong or classical. Proofs of strong propositions must be…
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…
In dialogical argumentation it is often assumed that the involved parties always correctly identify the intended statements posited by each other, realize all of the associated relations, conform to the three acceptability states (accepted,…