Related papers: On resolving conflicts between arguments
In the last years, there has been an increasing demand of a variety of logical systems, prompted mostly by applications of logic in AI and other related areas. Labeled Deductive Systems (LDS) were developed as a flexible methodology to…
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…
Argumentation is a promising model for reasoning with uncertain knowledge. The key concept of acceptability enables to differentiate arguments and counterarguments: The certainty of a proposition can then be evaluated through the most…
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…
Argumentation theory is a powerful paradigm that formalizes a type of commonsense reasoning that aims to simulate the human ability to resolve a specific problem in an intelligent manner. A classical argumentation process takes into account…
This article is devoted to the study of methods to change defeasible logic programs (de.l.p.s) which are the knowledge bases used by the Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) interpreter. DeLP is an argumentation formalism that allows to…
Constructing assurance cases is a widely used, and sometimes required, process toward demonstrating that safety-critical systems will operate safely in their planned environment. To mitigate the risk of errors and missing edge cases, the…
When deciding how to act, we must consider other agents' norms and values. However, our norms are ever-evolving. We often add exceptions or change our minds, and thus norms can conflict over time. Therefore, to maintain an accurate mental…
In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have made significant advancements in developing human-like and engaging dialogue systems. However, in tasks such as consensus-building and persuasion, LLMs often struggle to resolve conflicts…
In ASPIC-style structured argumentation an argument can rebut another argument by attacking its conclusion. Two ways of formalizing rebuttal have been proposed: In restricted rebuttal, the attacked conclusion must have been arrived at with…
We define a logic of propositional formula schemata adding to the syntax of propositional logic indexed propositions and iterated connectives ranging over intervals parameterized by arithmetic variables. The satisfiability problem is shown…
We consider multi-agent argumentation, where each agent's view of the arguments is encoded as an argumentation framework (AF). Then we study deliberative processes than can occur on this basis. We think of a deliberative process as taking…
We present an extension-based approach for computing and verifying preferences in an abstract argumentation system. Although numerous argumentation semantics have been developed previously for identifying acceptable sets of arguments from…
We introduce Forecasting Argumentation Frameworks (FAFs), a novel argumentation-based methodology for forecasting informed by recent judgmental forecasting research. FAFs comprise update frameworks which empower (human or artificial) agents…
We consider the decidability of the verification problem of programs \emph{modulo axioms} --- that is, verifying whether programs satisfy their assertions, when the functions and relations it uses are assumed to interpreted by arbitrary…
Assumption-based Argumentation (ABA) is advocated as a unifying formalism for various forms of non-monotonic reasoning, including logic programming. It allows capturing defeasible knowledge, subject to argumentative debate. While, in much…
Considerable attention has been given to the problem of non-monotonic reasoning in a belief function framework. Earlier work (M. Ginsberg) proposed solutions introducing meta-rules which recognized conditional independencies in a…
A traditional assurance case employs a positive argument in which reasoning steps, grounded on evidence and assumptions, sustain a top claim that has external significance. Human judgement is required to check the evidence, the assumptions,…
In this paper we present a transformation of finite propositional default theories into so-called propositional argumentation systems. This transformation allows to characterize all notions of Reiter's default logic in the framework of…
The KLM approach to defeasible reasoning introduces a weakened form of implication into classical logic. This allows one to incorporate exceptions to general rules into a logical system, and for old conclusions to be withdrawn upon learning…