Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties

Autores
Chesñevar, Carlos Iván; Simari, Guillermo Ricardo
Año de publicación
2001
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
documento de conferencia
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has long dealt with the issue of finding a suitable formalization for commonsense reasoning. Defeasible argumentation has proven to be a successful approach in many respects, proving to be a confluence point for many alternative logical frameworks. Different formalisms have been developed, most of them sharing the common notions of argument and warrant. In defeasible argumentation, an argument is a tentative (defeasible) proof for reaching a conclusion. An argument is warranted when it ultimately prevails over other con°icting arguments. In this context, defeasible consequence relationships for modeling argument and warrant as well as their logical properties have gained particular attention. This paper discusses two consequence operators for the LDSar framework for defeasible argumentation. The operators are intended for modeling argument construction and dialectical analysis (warrant), respectively. Their associated logical properties are studied and contrasted with SLD-based Horn logic. We contend that this analysis provides useful comparison criteria that can be extended and applied to other argumentation frameworks.
Eje: Informática teórica
Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)
Materia
Ciencias Informáticas
informática
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
defeasible argumentation
knowledge representation
non-monotonic inference
labeled deduction
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
SEDICI (UNLP)
Institución
Universidad Nacional de La Plata
OAI Identificador
oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/23290

id SEDICI_7245bc039bc72e338aa0053f25bd4e68
oai_identifier_str oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/23290
network_acronym_str SEDICI
repository_id_str 1329
network_name_str SEDICI (UNLP)
spelling Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical propertiesChesñevar, Carlos IvánSimari, Guillermo RicardoCiencias InformáticasinformáticaARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCEdefeasible argumentationknowledge representationnon-monotonic inferencelabeled deductionArtificial Intelligence (AI) has long dealt with the issue of finding a suitable formalization for commonsense reasoning. Defeasible argumentation has proven to be a successful approach in many respects, proving to be a confluence point for many alternative logical frameworks. Different formalisms have been developed, most of them sharing the common notions of argument and warrant. In defeasible argumentation, an argument is a tentative (defeasible) proof for reaching a conclusion. An argument is warranted when it ultimately prevails over other con°icting arguments. In this context, defeasible consequence relationships for modeling argument and warrant as well as their logical properties have gained particular attention. This paper discusses two consequence operators for the LDSar framework for defeasible argumentation. The operators are intended for modeling argument construction and dialectical analysis (warrant), respectively. Their associated logical properties are studied and contrasted with SLD-based Horn logic. We contend that this analysis provides useful comparison criteria that can be extended and applied to other argumentation frameworks.Eje: Informática teóricaRed de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)2001-10info: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/10915/23290enginfo: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:UNLP2025-10-15T10:48:00Zoai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/23290Institucionalhttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/Universidad públicaNo correspondehttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/oai/snrdalira@sedici.unlp.edu.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:13292025-10-15 10:48:01.115SEDICI (UNLP) - Universidad Nacional de La Platafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
title Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
spellingShingle Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
Chesñevar, Carlos Iván
Ciencias Informáticas
informática
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
defeasible argumentation
knowledge representation
non-monotonic inference
labeled deduction
title_short Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
title_full Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
title_fullStr Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
title_full_unstemmed Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
title_sort Consequence operators for defeasible argumentation: characterization and logical properties
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
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
defeasible argumentation
knowledge representation
non-monotonic inference
labeled deduction
topic Ciencias Informáticas
informática
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
defeasible argumentation
knowledge representation
non-monotonic inference
labeled deduction
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Artificial Intelligence (AI) has long dealt with the issue of finding a suitable formalization for commonsense reasoning. Defeasible argumentation has proven to be a successful approach in many respects, proving to be a confluence point for many alternative logical frameworks. Different formalisms have been developed, most of them sharing the common notions of argument and warrant. In defeasible argumentation, an argument is a tentative (defeasible) proof for reaching a conclusion. An argument is warranted when it ultimately prevails over other con°icting arguments. In this context, defeasible consequence relationships for modeling argument and warrant as well as their logical properties have gained particular attention. This paper discusses two consequence operators for the LDSar framework for defeasible argumentation. The operators are intended for modeling argument construction and dialectical analysis (warrant), respectively. Their associated logical properties are studied and contrasted with SLD-based Horn logic. We contend that this analysis provides useful comparison criteria that can be extended and applied to other argumentation frameworks.
Eje: Informática teórica
Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)
description Artificial Intelligence (AI) has long dealt with the issue of finding a suitable formalization for commonsense reasoning. Defeasible argumentation has proven to be a successful approach in many respects, proving to be a confluence point for many alternative logical frameworks. Different formalisms have been developed, most of them sharing the common notions of argument and warrant. In defeasible argumentation, an argument is a tentative (defeasible) proof for reaching a conclusion. An argument is warranted when it ultimately prevails over other con°icting arguments. In this context, defeasible consequence relationships for modeling argument and warrant as well as their logical properties have gained particular attention. This paper discusses two consequence operators for the LDSar framework for defeasible argumentation. The operators are intended for modeling argument construction and dialectical analysis (warrant), respectively. Their associated logical properties are studied and contrasted with SLD-based Horn logic. We contend that this analysis provides useful comparison criteria that can be extended and applied to other argumentation frameworks.
publishDate 2001
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2001-10
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/10915/23290
url http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/23290
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_ 1846063907341336576
score 13.22299