Vidal's library
Title: 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