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
- Institución
- Universidad Nacional de La Plata
- OAI Identificador
- oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/23290
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
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 |