Advertisement

Argumentation Based on Classical Logic

  • Philippe Besnard
  • Anthony Hunter
Chapter

Argumentation is an important cognitive process for dealing with conflicting information by generating and/or comparing arguments. Often it is based on constructing and comparing deductive arguments. These are arguments that involve some premises (which we refer to as the support of the argument) and a conclusion (which we refer to as the claim of the argument) such that the support deductively entails the claim.

Keywords

Classical Logic Private Life Argument Framework Classical Propositional Logic Attack Relation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Maria Vanina Martinez for feedback on an earlier draft of this chapter.

References

  1. 1.
    L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation. In G. Cooper and S. Moral, editors, Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1998), pages 1–7. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ph. Besnard, A. Hunter, and S. Woltran. Encoding deductive argumentation in quantified boolean formulae. Technical Report DBAI-TR-2008-60, Database and Artificial Intelligence Group, Institute of Information Systems, Technischen Universität Wien, 2008.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence, 128:203–235, 2001.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. Practical first-order argumentation. In Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), pages 590–595. MIT Press,2005.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. Knowledgebase compilation for efficient logical argumentation. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Knowledge Representation (KR 2006), pages 123–133. AAAI Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ph. Besnard and A. Hunter. Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Black and A. Hunter. Using enthymemes in an inquiry dialogue system. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS´08), pages 437–444. ACM Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Caminada and L. Amgoud. An axiomatic account of formal argumentation. In Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), pages 608–613, 2005.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Caminada. On the issue of contraposition of defeasible rules. In Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pages 109–115. IOS Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Chesñevar, A. Maguitman, and R. Loui. Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Surveys, 32:337–383, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. Dialectical proof procedures for assumption-based admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence, 170:114–159, 2006.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. Efstathiou and A. Hunter. Algorithms for effective argumentation in classical propositional logic. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems (FOIKS´08), volume 4932 of LNCS, pages 272–290. Springer, 2008.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    V. Efstathiou and A. Hunter. Focused search for arguments from propositional knowledge. In Computation Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pages 159–170. IOS Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Fox, P. Krause, and M. Elvang-Gøransson. Argumentation as a general framework for uncertain reasoning. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI 1993), pages 428–434. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. García and G. Simari. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 4:95–138, 2004.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. Hunter. Real arguments are approximate arguments. In Proceedings of the 22nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI´07), pages 66–71. MIT Press, 2007.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Hunter. Reasoning about the appropriateness of proponents for arguments. In Proceedings of the 23rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI´08). MIT Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    N. Mann and A. Hunter. Argumentation using temporal knowledge. In Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA´08, pages 204–215. IOS Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Nute. Defeasible logics. In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Volume 3: Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertainty Reasoning, pages 355–395. Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Pollock. How to reason defeasibly. Artificial Intelligence, 57:1–42, 1992.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logic, 7:25–75, 1997.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In D. Gabbay, editor, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pages 219–318. Kluwer, 2002.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. Simari and R. Loui. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation. Artificial Intelligence, 53:125–157, 1992.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    B. Verheij. Automated argument assistance for lawyers. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 1999), pages 43–52. ACM Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    G. Vreeswijk. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence, 90:225–279, 1997.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag US 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philippe Besnard
    • 1
  • Anthony Hunter
    • 2
  1. 1.IRITUniversite Paul SabatierToulouseFrance
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations