Optimization of dialectical outcomes in dialogical argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Optimization of dialectical outcomes in dialogical argumentation
When informal arguments are presented, there may be imprecision in the language used, and so the audience may be uncertain as to the structure of the argument graph as intended by the presenter of the arguments. For a presenter of arguments, it is useful to know the audience’s argument graph, but the presenter may be uncertain as to the structure of it. To model the uncertainty as to the struct...
متن کاملProbabilistic Strategies in Dialogical Argumentation
In dialogical argumentation, a participant is often unsure what moves the other participant(s) might make. If the dialogue is proceeding according to some accepted protocol, then a participant might be able to determine what are the possible moves that the other might make, but the participant might be unsure as to which move will be chosen by the other agent. In this paper, propositional execu...
متن کاملDialectical Explanations in Defeasible Argumentation
This work addresses the problem of providing explanation capabilities to an argumentation system. Explanation in defeasible argumentation is an important, and yet undeveloped field in the area. Therefore, we move in this direction by defining a concrete argument system with explanation facilities. We consider the structures that provide information on the warrant status of a literal. Our focus ...
متن کاملExecutable Logic for Dialogical Argumentation
Argumentation between agents through dialogue is an important cognitive activity. There have been a number of proposals for formalizing dialogical argumentation. However, each proposal involves a number of quite complex definitions, and there is significant diversity in the way different proposals define similar features. This complexity and diversity has hindered analysis and comparison of the...
متن کاملFrom systems for defeasible argumentation to dialogical systems of argumentation
Nonmonotonic reasoning is a reasoning in which temporary conclusions can be drawn on the basis of incomplete information but which might be withdrawn when more information becomes available. Systems for defeasible argumentation capture this kind of reasoning in terms of interactions between conflictual arguments. Nonmonotonic reasoning is explained in terms of defeasibility since arguments can ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
سال: 2016
ISSN: 0888-613X
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijar.2016.06.014