A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report
- Autores
- Chesñevar, Carlos Iván; Simari, Guillermo Ricardo
- Año de publicación
- 1998
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- documento de conferencia
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- Argumentative systems [SL92, Vre93, Che96] are formalizations of defeasible reasoning [Pol87, Nut88]. An argument is a tentative piece of reasoning an intelligent agent can use to reach a given conclusion. In case there is information available supporting counterarguments which defeat the argument, its conclusion will no longer be valid. In order to determine whether a conclusion h is justified belief, it is necessary to consider a tree-like structure (having an argument A for h as its root), in which defeaters for A, defeaters for these defeaters, and so on, must be taken into account. If the argument A prevails over all its associated defeaters, then A is called a justification for h. Currently there exist several alternative formalizations of defeasible argumentation. recent work [PS96, KT96, BDKT97] has shown that defeasible argumentation constitutes a point of confluence for the characterization of different approaches to monotonic reasoning (NMR). from the early '90 ther have been several attempts to find a unified logical framework for NMR. In this aspect, the labelled deductive system [Gab96a] (or LDS) constitute an attractive approach, allowing to characterize different logics by introducing labels as part of the logic 's object language and keeping a single inference mechanism for all logics. This paper presents a formal approach for characterizing defeasible argumentation in terms of LDS. Inference rules are present in the style of natural deduction, and they capture the process of defeasible argumentation as defined in the MTDR framework [SL92, SCG94]. We contend that this approach make easier to state and prove properties and characteristics of defeasible argumentation within logical-deductive setting.
V Workshop sobre Aspectos Teóricos de la Inteligencia Artificial (ATIA)
Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI) - Materia
-
Ciencias Informáticas
Informática
Inteligencia Artificial
defeasible reasoning
argumentative systems
labelled deductive systems - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Universidad Nacional de La Plata
- OAI Identificador
- oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/24866
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
SEDICI_06ca91c31e06edb3f17e76817f22fc2e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/24866 |
network_acronym_str |
SEDICI |
repository_id_str |
1329 |
network_name_str |
SEDICI (UNLP) |
spelling |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary reportChesñevar, Carlos IvánSimari, Guillermo RicardoCiencias InformáticasInformáticaInteligencia Artificialdefeasible reasoningargumentative systemslabelled deductive systemsArgumentative systems [SL92, Vre93, Che96] are formalizations of defeasible reasoning [Pol87, Nut88]. An argument is a tentative piece of reasoning an intelligent agent can use to reach a given conclusion. In case there is information available supporting counterarguments which defeat the argument, its conclusion will no longer be valid. In order to determine whether a conclusion h is justified belief, it is necessary to consider a tree-like structure (having an argument A for h as its root), in which defeaters for A, defeaters for these defeaters, and so on, must be taken into account. If the argument A prevails over all its associated defeaters, then A is called a justification for h. Currently there exist several alternative formalizations of defeasible argumentation. recent work [PS96, KT96, BDKT97] has shown that defeasible argumentation constitutes a point of confluence for the characterization of different approaches to monotonic reasoning (NMR). from the early '90 ther have been several attempts to find a unified logical framework for NMR. In this aspect, the labelled deductive system [Gab96a] (or LDS) constitute an attractive approach, allowing to characterize different logics by introducing labels as part of the logic 's object language and keeping a single inference mechanism for all logics. This paper presents a formal approach for characterizing defeasible argumentation in terms of LDS. Inference rules are present in the style of natural deduction, and they capture the process of defeasible argumentation as defined in the MTDR framework [SL92, SCG94]. We contend that this approach make easier to state and prove properties and characteristics of defeasible argumentation within logical-deductive setting.V Workshop sobre Aspectos Teóricos de la Inteligencia Artificial (ATIA)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)1998-10info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObjectinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionObjeto de conferenciahttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferenciaapplication/pdfhttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/24866enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Argentina (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5)reponame:SEDICI (UNLP)instname:Universidad Nacional de La Platainstacron:UNLP2025-09-17T09:39:26Zoai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/24866Institucionalhttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/Universidad públicaNo correspondehttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/oai/snrdalira@sedici.unlp.edu.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:13292025-09-17 09:39:26.933SEDICI (UNLP) - Universidad Nacional de La Platafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
title |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
spellingShingle |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report Chesñevar, Carlos Iván Ciencias Informáticas Informática Inteligencia Artificial defeasible reasoning argumentative systems labelled deductive systems |
title_short |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
title_full |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
title_fullStr |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
title_full_unstemmed |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
title_sort |
A formalization of defeasible argumentation using labelled deductive systems : Preliminary report |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Chesñevar, Carlos Iván Simari, Guillermo Ricardo |
author |
Chesñevar, Carlos Iván |
author_facet |
Chesñevar, Carlos Iván Simari, Guillermo Ricardo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Simari, Guillermo Ricardo |
author2_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Ciencias Informáticas Informática Inteligencia Artificial defeasible reasoning argumentative systems labelled deductive systems |
topic |
Ciencias Informáticas Informática Inteligencia Artificial defeasible reasoning argumentative systems labelled deductive systems |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Argumentative systems [SL92, Vre93, Che96] are formalizations of defeasible reasoning [Pol87, Nut88]. An argument is a tentative piece of reasoning an intelligent agent can use to reach a given conclusion. In case there is information available supporting counterarguments which defeat the argument, its conclusion will no longer be valid. In order to determine whether a conclusion h is justified belief, it is necessary to consider a tree-like structure (having an argument A for h as its root), in which defeaters for A, defeaters for these defeaters, and so on, must be taken into account. If the argument A prevails over all its associated defeaters, then A is called a justification for h. Currently there exist several alternative formalizations of defeasible argumentation. recent work [PS96, KT96, BDKT97] has shown that defeasible argumentation constitutes a point of confluence for the characterization of different approaches to monotonic reasoning (NMR). from the early '90 ther have been several attempts to find a unified logical framework for NMR. In this aspect, the labelled deductive system [Gab96a] (or LDS) constitute an attractive approach, allowing to characterize different logics by introducing labels as part of the logic 's object language and keeping a single inference mechanism for all logics. This paper presents a formal approach for characterizing defeasible argumentation in terms of LDS. Inference rules are present in the style of natural deduction, and they capture the process of defeasible argumentation as defined in the MTDR framework [SL92, SCG94]. We contend that this approach make easier to state and prove properties and characteristics of defeasible argumentation within logical-deductive setting. V Workshop sobre Aspectos Teóricos de la Inteligencia Artificial (ATIA) Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI) |
description |
Argumentative systems [SL92, Vre93, Che96] are formalizations of defeasible reasoning [Pol87, Nut88]. An argument is a tentative piece of reasoning an intelligent agent can use to reach a given conclusion. In case there is information available supporting counterarguments which defeat the argument, its conclusion will no longer be valid. In order to determine whether a conclusion h is justified belief, it is necessary to consider a tree-like structure (having an argument A for h as its root), in which defeaters for A, defeaters for these defeaters, and so on, must be taken into account. If the argument A prevails over all its associated defeaters, then A is called a justification for h. Currently there exist several alternative formalizations of defeasible argumentation. recent work [PS96, KT96, BDKT97] has shown that defeasible argumentation constitutes a point of confluence for the characterization of different approaches to monotonic reasoning (NMR). from the early '90 ther have been several attempts to find a unified logical framework for NMR. In this aspect, the labelled deductive system [Gab96a] (or LDS) constitute an attractive approach, allowing to characterize different logics by introducing labels as part of the logic 's object language and keeping a single inference mechanism for all logics. This paper presents a formal approach for characterizing defeasible argumentation in terms of LDS. Inference rules are present in the style of natural deduction, and they capture the process of defeasible argumentation as defined in the MTDR framework [SL92, SCG94]. We contend that this approach make easier to state and prove properties and characteristics of defeasible argumentation within logical-deductive setting. |
publishDate |
1998 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
1998-10 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Objeto de conferencia http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794 info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferencia |
format |
conferenceObject |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/24866 |
url |
http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/24866 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Argentina (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5) |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 Argentina (CC BY-NC-SA 2.5) |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:SEDICI (UNLP) instname:Universidad Nacional de La Plata instacron:UNLP |
reponame_str |
SEDICI (UNLP) |
collection |
SEDICI (UNLP) |
instname_str |
Universidad Nacional de La Plata |
instacron_str |
UNLP |
institution |
UNLP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
SEDICI (UNLP) - Universidad Nacional de La Plata |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
alira@sedici.unlp.edu.ar |
_version_ |
1843532067762077696 |
score |
13.004268 |