Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Correct Grounded Reasoning with Presumptive Arguments

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10021))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We address the semantics and normative questions for reasoning with presumptive arguments: How are presumptive arguments grounded in interpretations; and when are they evaluated as correct? For deductive and uncertain reasoning, classical logic and probability theory provide canonical answers to these questions. Staying formally close to these, we propose case models and their preferences as formal semantics for the interpretation of presumptive arguments. Arguments are evaluated as presumptively valid when they make a case that is maximally preferred. By qualitative and quantitative representation results, we show formal relations between deductive, uncertain and presumptive reasoning. In this way, the work is a step to the connection of logical and probabilistic approaches in AI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Amgoud, L.: Postulates for logic-based argumentation systems. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 55(9), 2028–2048 (2014)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Amgoud, L., Caminada, M.: On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artif. Intell. 172, 286–310 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: Review: an introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26(4), 365–410 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Benthem, J. van: Foundations of conditional logic. J. Philos. Logic 13, 303–349 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Besnard, P., García, A.J., Hunter, A., Modgil, S., Prakken, H., Simari, G.R., Toni, F.: Introduction to structured argumentation. Argument Comput. 5, 1–4 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artif. Intell. 128, 203–235 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Bochman, A.: A Logical Theory of Nonmonotonic Inference and Belief Change. Springer, Berlin (2001)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Bondarenko, A., Dung, P.M., Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F.: An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artif. Intell. 93, 63–101 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Dawid, A.P.: Beware of the DAG! In: Guyon, I., Janzing, D., Schölkopf, B. (eds.) JMLR Workshop and Conference Proceedings. Causality: Objectives and Assessment (NIPS 2008 Workshop), vol. 6, pp. 59–86 (2010). jmlr.org

  10. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Possibility theory, probability theory and multiple-valued logics: a clarification. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 32(1), 35–66 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Eemeren, F. H. van, Garssen, B., Krabbe, E.C.W., Henkemans, A.F.S., Verheij, B., Wagemans, J.H.M.: Argumentation in artificial intelligence. In: Eemeren, F. H. van, et al. (eds.) Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Springer, Berlin (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  13. García, A.J., Simari, G.R.: Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach. Theory Pract. Logic Program. 4(2), 95–138 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Hunter, A.: A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 54, 47–81 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Hunter, A.: Probabilistic qualification of attack in abstract argumentation. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 55, 607–638 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Kraus, S., Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artif. Intell. 44, 167–207 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Li, H., Oren, N., Norman, T.J.: Probabilistic argumentation frameworks. In: Modgil, S., Oren, N., Toni, F. (eds.) TAFA 2011. LNCS, vol. 7132, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Makinson, D.: General patterns in nonmonotonic reasoning. In: Gabbay, D.M., Hogger, C.J., Robinson, J.A. (eds.) Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning, vol. 3, pp. 35–110. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: A general account of argumentation with preferences. Artif. Intell. 195, 361–397 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Pollock, J.L.: Defeasible reasoning. Cogn. Sci. 11(4), 481–518 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pollock, J.L.: Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument Comput. 1(2), 93–124 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Roberts, F.S.: Measurement Theory with Applications to Decisionmaking, Utility, and the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Russell, S.: Unifying logic and probability. Commun. ACM 58(7), 88–97 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Simari, G.R.: On the properties of the relation between argumentation semantics and argumentation inference operators. In: Parsons, S., Oren, N., Reed, C., Cerutti, F. (eds.) Computational Models of Argument, Proceedings of COMMA 2014, pp. 3–8. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Thimm, M.: A probabilistic semantics for abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2012), pp. 750–755. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Toulmin, S.E.: The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1958)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Verheij, B.: Argumentation and rules with exceptions. In: Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, Desenzano del Garda, Italy, 8–10 September 2010, pp. 455–462. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Verheij, B.: Jumping to conclusions. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds.) JELIA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7519, pp. 411–423. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Verheij, B.: Arguments and their strength: revisiting Pollock’s anti-probabilistic starting points. In: Parsons, S., Oren, N., Reed, C., Cerutti, F. (eds.) Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2014, pp. 433–444. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Verheij, B.: To catch a thief with and without numbers: arguments, scenarios and probabilities in evidential reasoning. Law Probab. Risk 13, 307–325 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Verheij, B., Bex, F.J., Timmer, S.T., Vlek, C.S., Meyer, J.J., Renooij, S., Prakken, H.: Arguments, scenarios and probabilities: connections between three normative frameworks for evidential reasoning. Law Probab. Risk 15, 35–70 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Artificial Intelligence, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Bart Verheij

Authors
  1. Bart Verheij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bart Verheij .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Open University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Loizos Michael

  2. University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Antonis Kakas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Verheij, B. (2016). Correct Grounded Reasoning with Presumptive Arguments. In: Michael, L., Kakas, A. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10021. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48758-8_31

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-48757-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-48758-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation