Vidal's libraryTitle: | A Reasoning Model Based on the Production of Acceptable Arguments |
Author: | Leila Amgoud and Claudette Cayrol |
Journal: | Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence |
Volume: | 34 |
Number: | 1--3 |
Pages: | 197--215 |
Year: | 2002 |
DOI: | 10.1023/A:1014490210693 |
Abstract: | Argumentation is a reasoning model based on the construction of arguments and counter-arguments (or defeaters) followed by the selection of the most acceptable of them. In this paper, we refine the argumentation framework proposed by Dung by taking into account preference relations between arguments in order to integrate two complementary points of view on the concept of acceptability: acceptability based on the existence of direct counter-arguments and acceptability based on the existence of defenders. An argument is thus acceptable if it is preferred to its direct defeaters or if it is defended against its defeaters. This also refines previous works by Prakken and Sartor, by associating with each argument a notion of strength, while these authors embed preferences in the definition of the defeat relation. We propose a revised proof theory in terms of AND/OR trees, verifying if a given argument is acceptable, which better reflects the dialectical form of argumentation. |
Cited by 48 - Google Scholar
@Article{amgoud02a,
author = {Leila Amgoud and Claudette Cayrol},
title = {A Reasoning Model Based on the Production of
Acceptable Arguments},
journal = {Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence},
year = 2002,
volume = 34,
number = {1--3},
pages = {197--215},
abstract = {Argumentation is a reasoning model based on the
construction of arguments and counter-arguments (or
defeaters) followed by the selection of the most
acceptable of them. In this paper, we refine the
argumentation framework proposed by Dung by taking
into account preference relations between arguments
in order to integrate two complementary points of
view on the concept of acceptability: acceptability
based on the existence of direct counter-arguments
and acceptability based on the existence of
defenders. An argument is thus acceptable if it is
preferred to its direct defeaters or if it is
defended against its defeaters. This also refines
previous works by Prakken and Sartor, by associating
with each argument a notion of strength, while these
authors embed preferences in the definition of the
defeat relation. We propose a revised proof theory
in terms of AND/OR trees, verifying if a given
argument is acceptable, which better reflects the
dialectical form of argumentation.},
doi = {10.1023/A:1014490210693},
url = {http://jmvidal.cse.sc.edu/library/amgoud02a.pdf},
cluster = {12720894782169645409},
keywords = {argumentation}
}
Last modified: Wed Mar 9 10:15:40 EST 2011