Multiple subarguments in logic, argumentation, rhetoric and text generation

  • Chris Reed
  • Derek Long
Accepted Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1244)


A summary is provided of the problems of representing, determining generating and arranging disjunct multiple subarguments in several fields, including formal systems in uncertain domains, informal logic accounts of argument structure, rhetorical systems for maximising persuasive effect, and the automatic generation of persuasive discourse. Drawing upon the insights, problems, and partial solutions of these fields, a theory of subargument construction and organisation is presented, and is set in a framework for generating natural language argument.


aggregating arguments argumentation theory rhetoric defeasible reasoning natural language generation planning rhetoric 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baccus F. & Yang Q. “The expected value of hierarchical problem-solving”, in Proceedings of the National Conference on AI (AAA1'92) (1992)Google Scholar
  2. Billig, M., Arguing and thinking (Second edition), Cambridge University Press (1996)Google Scholar
  3. Blair, H. Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, Charles Daly, London (1838)Google Scholar
  4. Bratman, M.E., Israel, DJ., Pollack, M.E., “Plans and resource-bounded practical reasoning”, Computational Intelligence 4 (1988) 349–355Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, R., “Analyzing the Structure of Argumentative Discourse”, Computational Linguistics 13(1) (1987) 11–24Google Scholar
  6. Das, S., Fox, J. & Krause, P., “A Unified Framework for Hypothetical and Practical Reasoning (1): Theoretical Foundations”, in Gabbay, D. & Ohlbach, H.J. Practical Reasoning, Springer Verlag (1996) 58–72Google Scholar
  7. Dung, P.M., “On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games”, Artificial Intelligence 77 (1995) 321–357Google Scholar
  8. Fisher, A., The Logic of Real Arguments, Cambridge University Press (1988)Google Scholar
  9. Fogelin, R.J. & Sinnott-Armstrong, W., Understanding Arguments (Fourth Edition), Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers (1991)Google Scholar
  10. Fox, J. & Das, S., “A Unified Framework for Hypothetical and Practical Reasoning (2): Lessons from Medical Applications”, in Gabbay, D. & Ohlbach, H.J. Practical Reasoning, Springer Verlag (1996) 73–92Google Scholar
  11. Fox, M. & Long, D.P. “Hierarchical Planning using Abstraction”, IEE Proceedings on Control Theory and Applications 142 (3) (1995)Google Scholar
  12. Freeman, J.B., Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments, Foris (1991)Google Scholar
  13. Hovy, E.H., “Pragmatics and Natural Language Generation”, Artificial Intelligence 43 (1991) 153–197Google Scholar
  14. Hovy, E.H. “Automated Discourse Generation Using Discourse Structure Relations”, Artificial Intelligence 63 (1993) 341–385Google Scholar
  15. Krause, P., Ambler, S., Elvang-Gøransson, M. & Fox, J., “A Logic of Argumentation for Reasoning under Uncertainty”, Computational Intelligence 11 (1995) 113–131Google Scholar
  16. Mann, W.C. & Thompson, S.A. “Rhetorical structure theory: description and construction of text structures” in Kempen, G., Natural Language Generation: New Results in AI, Psychology and Linguistics, Kluwer (1986) 279–300Google Scholar
  17. Marcu, D., “The Conceptual and Linguistic Facets of Persuasive Arguments”, in Working Notes of the ECAI'96 Workshop on Planning and NLG (1996) 43–46Google Scholar
  18. Maybury, M.T., “Communicative Acts for Generating Natural Language Arguments”, in Proceedings of the 11th National Conference on AI (AAAI'93) (1993) 357–364Google Scholar
  19. McConachy, R. & Zukerman, I., “Using Argument Graphs to Generate Arguments”, in Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on AI (ECAI'96) (1996) 592–596Google Scholar
  20. Meteer, M., Expressibility and the Problem of Efficient Text Planning, Francis Pinter (1993)Google Scholar
  21. Moore, J.D., Paris, C.L. “Planning Text for Advisory Dialogues: Capturing Intentional and Rhetorical Information”, Computational Linguistics 19 (4) (1994) 651–694Google Scholar
  22. Parsons, S., “Defining Normative Systems for Qualitative Argumentation”, in Gabbay, D. & Ohlbach, H.J. Practical Reasoning, Springer Verlag (1996) 449–463Google Scholar
  23. Parsons, S. & Jennings, N.R., “Negotiation Through Argumentation — a Preliminary Report”, in Proceedings of the International Conf on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS'96) (1996)Google Scholar
  24. Pollock, J.L., Cognitive Carpentry, MIT Press (1995)Google Scholar
  25. Pollock, J. L., “Implementing Defeasible Reasoning”, in Working Notes of the FAPR'96 Workshop on Computational Dialectics (1996)Google Scholar
  26. Reed, C.A., Long, D.P., Fox, M. & Garagnani, M., “Persuasion as a Form of Inter-Agent Negotiation”, in Proceedings of the 2nd Australian Workshop on DAI (1996a, to appear)Google Scholar
  27. Reed, C.A., Long, D.P. & Fox, M. “An Architecture for Argumentative Dialogue Planning”, in Gabbay, D. & Ohlbach, H.J. Practical Reasoning, Springer Verlag (1996b) 555–566Google Scholar
  28. Reed, C.A. & Long, D.P., “Ordering and Focusing in an Architecture for Persuasive Discourse”, under review for European Workshop on Natural Language Generation (EWNLG'97) (1997)Google Scholar
  29. Sacerdoti, E.D. A structure for plans and behaviour, Elsevier, North Holland (1977)Google Scholar
  30. Sillince, J.A.A & Minors, R.H., “Argumentation, Self-Inconsistency, and Multidimensional Argument Strength”, Communication and Cognition 25 (4) (1992) 325–338Google Scholar
  31. Smith, M.H., Garigliano, R., Morgan, R.C. “Generation in the LOLITA system: An engineering approach” in Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on NLG, Kennebunkport, Maine (1994)Google Scholar
  32. Sycara, K. “Argumentation: Planning Other Agent's Plans” in Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on AI (IJCAI'89) (1989) 517–523Google Scholar
  33. Toulmin, S.E., The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press (1958)Google Scholar
  34. Vreeswijk, G., “Reasoning with Defeasible Arguments”, in Wagner, G. & Pearce, D. (eds) Proc. of the European Workshop on Logics in AI (JELIA'92), Springer Verlag (1992) 189–211Google Scholar
  35. Walton, D.N. & Krabbe, E.C.W., Commitment in Dialogue, State University of New York Press (1995)Google Scholar
  36. Whately, R. Logic, Richard Griffin, London (1855)Google Scholar
  37. Wooldridge, M. & Jennings, N.R., “Intelligent Agents: Theory and Practice”, The Knowledge Engineering Review 10 (2) (1995) 115–152Google Scholar
  38. Yanal, R.J., “'Convergent’ and ‘Linked’ Reasons.”, APA Newsletter on Teaching Philosophy, 4 (5), (1984)1–3Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Reed
    • 1
  • Derek Long
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity College LondonLondon
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceDurham UniversityDurham

Personalised recommendations