相关论文: Using Enthymemes to Fill the Gap between Logical A…
Argument mining is natural language processing technology aimed at identifying arguments in text. Furthermore, the approach is being developed to identify the premises and claims of those arguments, and to identify the relationships between…
An argument can be seen as a pair consisting of a set of premises and a claim supported by them. Arguments used by humans are often enthymemes, i.e., some premises are implicit. To better understand, evaluate, and compare enthymemes, it is…
The notion of argumentation and the one of belief stand in a problematic relation to one another. On the one hand, argumentation is crucial for belief formation: as the outcome of a process of arguing, an agent might come to (justifiably)…
Real-world arguments in text and dialogues are normally enthymemes (i.e. some of their premises and/or claims are implicit). Natural language processing (NLP) methods for handling enthymemes can potentially identify enthymemes in text but…
This paper combines two studies: a topological semantics for epistemic notions and abstract argumentation theory. In our combined setting, we use a topological semantics to represent the structure of an agent's collection of evidence, and…
Abstract argumentation offers an appealing way of representing and evaluating arguments and counterarguments. This approach can be enhanced by a probability assignment to each argument. There are various interpretations that can be ascribed…
Strong equivalence between knowledge bases ensures the possibility of replacing one with the other without affecting reasoning outcomes, in any given context. This makes it a crucial property in nonmonotonic formalisms. In particular, the…
This paper introduces epistemic graphs as a generalization of the epistemic approach to probabilistic argumentation. In these graphs, an argument can be believed or disbelieved up to a given degree, thus providing a more fine--grained…
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…
Enthymemes are defined as arguments where a premise or conclusion is left implicit. We tackle the task of generating the implicit premise in an enthymeme, which requires not only an understanding of the stated conclusion and premise but…
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…
Writing strong arguments can be challenging for learners. It requires to select and arrange multiple argumentative discourse units (ADUs) in a logical and coherent way as well as to decide which ADUs to leave implicit, so called enthymemes.…
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 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…
Effective memory management is essential for large language model (LLM) agents handling long-term interactions. Current memory frameworks typically treat agents as passive "recorders" and retrieve information without understanding its…
Modelling qualitative uncertainty in formal argumentation is essential both for practical applications and theoretical understanding. Yet, most of the existing works focus on \textit{abstract} models for arguing with uncertainty. Following…
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…
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…
This paper studies a fundamental mechanism of how to detect a conflict between arguments given sentiments regarding acceptability of the arguments. We introduce a concept of the inverse problem of the abstract argumentation to tackle the…
This paper presents an extension of temporal epistemic logic with operators that quantify over agent strategies. Unlike previous work on alternating temporal epistemic logic, the semantics works with systems whose states explicitly encode…