Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks

Autores
Martínez, Diego C.; Simari, Guillermo Ricardo
Año de publicación
2005
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
documento de conferencia
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
The area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning has been enriched during the past two decades with the addition of Argument-Based Reasoning Systems. In formal systems of defeasible argumentation, arguments for and against a proposition are produced and evaluated to test the acceptability of that proposition following a dialectical process. The main idea in these systems is that a proposition will be accepted as true if there exists an argument that supports it, and this argument is acceptable according to an analysis between it and its counterarguments (i.e., conflictive arguments). This analysis requires a process of comparison of conflicting arguments in order to decide which one is preferable. After this dialectical analysis is performed over the set of arguments in the system, some of them will be acceptable or justified arguments, while others will not. Argumentation is used as a form of non-monotonic or defeasible reasoning and it is suitable for modeling dialogues between intelligent agents. Abstract argumentation is a pathway to the study of common properties of defeasible argumentation systems. Due to the wide range of proposals in this area, each one introducing a new logic and therefore a new argument architecture, it is very interesting to define what may be understood as a correct process of argumentation, despites the differences among these systems. Perhaps one of the most important frameworks for abstract argumentation is defined by Dung in. In this work, arguments are abstract entities and no reference to the underlying logic is made. Arguments can attack other arguments, so a binary relation in the set of arguments is included, in order to model the set of conflicts in the framework. Several argument extensions capture the semantic of this system. The beauty of this work resides on its simplicity. However, some elements are missing, such as a subargument relation, and therefore some controversial situations can not be modeled.
Eje: Inteligencia artificial
Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)
Materia
Ciencias Informáticas
modelling argumentation lines
abstract frameworks
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Frameworks
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:10915/21164

id SEDICI_be074bfc6343cf2b73463c4ee11921af
oai_identifier_str oai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/21164
network_acronym_str SEDICI
repository_id_str 1329
network_name_str SEDICI (UNLP)
spelling Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworksMartínez, Diego C.Simari, Guillermo RicardoCiencias Informáticasmodelling argumentation linesabstract frameworksARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCEFrameworksThe area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning has been enriched during the past two decades with the addition of Argument-Based Reasoning Systems. In formal systems of defeasible argumentation, arguments for and against a proposition are produced and evaluated to test the acceptability of that proposition following a dialectical process. The main idea in these systems is that a proposition will be accepted as true if there exists an argument that supports it, and this argument is acceptable according to an analysis between it and its counterarguments (i.e., conflictive arguments). This analysis requires a process of comparison of conflicting arguments in order to decide which one is preferable. After this dialectical analysis is performed over the set of arguments in the system, some of them will be acceptable or justified arguments, while others will not. Argumentation is used as a form of non-monotonic or defeasible reasoning and it is suitable for modeling dialogues between intelligent agents. Abstract argumentation is a pathway to the study of common properties of defeasible argumentation systems. Due to the wide range of proposals in this area, each one introducing a new logic and therefore a new argument architecture, it is very interesting to define what may be understood as a correct process of argumentation, despites the differences among these systems. Perhaps one of the most important frameworks for abstract argumentation is defined by Dung in. In this work, arguments are abstract entities and no reference to the underlying logic is made. Arguments can attack other arguments, so a binary relation in the set of arguments is included, in order to model the set of conflicts in the framework. Several argument extensions capture the semantic of this system. The beauty of this work resides on its simplicity. However, some elements are missing, such as a subargument relation, and therefore some controversial situations can not be modeled.Eje: Inteligencia artificialRed de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)2005-05info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObjectinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionObjeto de conferenciahttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_5794info:ar-repo/semantics/documentoDeConferenciaapplication/pdf416-419http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/21164enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/isbn/950-665-337-2info: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:UNLP2025-10-15T10:47:09Zoai:sedici.unlp.edu.ar:10915/21164Institucionalhttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/Universidad públicaNo correspondehttp://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/oai/snrdalira@sedici.unlp.edu.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:13292025-10-15 10:47:10.026SEDICI (UNLP) - Universidad Nacional de La Platafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
title Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
spellingShingle Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
Martínez, Diego C.
Ciencias Informáticas
modelling argumentation lines
abstract frameworks
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Frameworks
title_short Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
title_full Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
title_fullStr Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
title_full_unstemmed Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
title_sort Modelling argumentation lines in abstract frameworks
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Martínez, Diego C.
Simari, Guillermo Ricardo
author Martínez, Diego C.
author_facet Martínez, Diego C.
Simari, Guillermo Ricardo
author_role author
author2 Simari, Guillermo Ricardo
author2_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Ciencias Informáticas
modelling argumentation lines
abstract frameworks
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Frameworks
topic Ciencias Informáticas
modelling argumentation lines
abstract frameworks
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Frameworks
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv The area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning has been enriched during the past two decades with the addition of Argument-Based Reasoning Systems. In formal systems of defeasible argumentation, arguments for and against a proposition are produced and evaluated to test the acceptability of that proposition following a dialectical process. The main idea in these systems is that a proposition will be accepted as true if there exists an argument that supports it, and this argument is acceptable according to an analysis between it and its counterarguments (i.e., conflictive arguments). This analysis requires a process of comparison of conflicting arguments in order to decide which one is preferable. After this dialectical analysis is performed over the set of arguments in the system, some of them will be acceptable or justified arguments, while others will not. Argumentation is used as a form of non-monotonic or defeasible reasoning and it is suitable for modeling dialogues between intelligent agents. Abstract argumentation is a pathway to the study of common properties of defeasible argumentation systems. Due to the wide range of proposals in this area, each one introducing a new logic and therefore a new argument architecture, it is very interesting to define what may be understood as a correct process of argumentation, despites the differences among these systems. Perhaps one of the most important frameworks for abstract argumentation is defined by Dung in. In this work, arguments are abstract entities and no reference to the underlying logic is made. Arguments can attack other arguments, so a binary relation in the set of arguments is included, in order to model the set of conflicts in the framework. Several argument extensions capture the semantic of this system. The beauty of this work resides on its simplicity. However, some elements are missing, such as a subargument relation, and therefore some controversial situations can not be modeled.
Eje: Inteligencia artificial
Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI)
description The area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning has been enriched during the past two decades with the addition of Argument-Based Reasoning Systems. In formal systems of defeasible argumentation, arguments for and against a proposition are produced and evaluated to test the acceptability of that proposition following a dialectical process. The main idea in these systems is that a proposition will be accepted as true if there exists an argument that supports it, and this argument is acceptable according to an analysis between it and its counterarguments (i.e., conflictive arguments). This analysis requires a process of comparison of conflicting arguments in order to decide which one is preferable. After this dialectical analysis is performed over the set of arguments in the system, some of them will be acceptable or justified arguments, while others will not. Argumentation is used as a form of non-monotonic or defeasible reasoning and it is suitable for modeling dialogues between intelligent agents. Abstract argumentation is a pathway to the study of common properties of defeasible argumentation systems. Due to the wide range of proposals in this area, each one introducing a new logic and therefore a new argument architecture, it is very interesting to define what may be understood as a correct process of argumentation, despites the differences among these systems. Perhaps one of the most important frameworks for abstract argumentation is defined by Dung in. In this work, arguments are abstract entities and no reference to the underlying logic is made. Arguments can attack other arguments, so a binary relation in the set of arguments is included, in order to model the set of conflicts in the framework. Several argument extensions capture the semantic of this system. The beauty of this work resides on its simplicity. However, some elements are missing, such as a subargument relation, and therefore some controversial situations can not be modeled.
publishDate 2005
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2005-05
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/10915/21164
url http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/21164
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/isbn/950-665-337-2
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
416-419
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_ 1846063896784273408
score 13.22299