Burdens of Proof in Monological Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
We shall argue that burdens of proof are relevant also to monological reasoning, i.e., for deriving the conclusions of a knowledge-base allowing for conflicting arguments. Reasoning with burdens of proof can provide a useful extension of current argument-based non-monotonic logics, at least a different perspective on them. Firstly we shall provide an objective characterisation of burdens of proof, assuming that burdens concerns rule antecedents (literals in the body of rules), rather than agents. Secondly, we shall analyse the conditions for a burden to be satisfied, by considering credulous or skeptical derivability of the concerned antecedent or of its complement. Finally, we shall develop a method for developing inferences out of a knowledge base merging rules and proof burdens in the framework of defeasible
منابع مشابه
Proof Burdens and Standards
This chapter explains the role of proof burdens and standards in argumentation, illustrates them using legal procedures, and surveys the history of research on computational models of these concepts. It also presents an original computational model which aims to integrate the features of these prior systems. The ‘mainstream’ conception of argumentation in the field of artificial intelligence is...
متن کاملOn modelling burdens and standards of proof in structured argumentation
A formal model is proposed of argumentation with burdens and standards of proof, overcoming shortcomings of earlier work. The model is based on a distinction between default and inverted burdens of proof. This distinction is formalised by adapting the definition of defeat of the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation. Since ASPIC+ generates abstract argumentation frameworks, the model is...
متن کاملBurden of Proof, Presumption and Argumentation
The notion of burden of proof and its companion notion of presumption are central to argumentation studies. This book argues that we can learn a lot from how the courts have developed procedures over the years for allocating and reasoning with presumptions and burdens of proof, and from how artifi cial intelligence has built precise formal and computational systems to represent this kind of rea...
متن کاملA Logical Analysis of Burdens of Proof
The legal concept of burden of proof is notoriously complex and ambiguous. Various kinds of burdens of proof have been distinguished, such as the burden of persuasion, burden of production and tactical burden of proof, and these notions have been described by different scholars in different ways. They have also been linked in various ways with notions like presumptions, standards of proof, and ...
متن کاملCombining Logical with Emotional Reasoning in Natural Argumentation
We discuss how emotions may affect shallow and inner forms of intelligence by considering, in particular, the case of argumentation. It has been proved that 'natural' argumentation system should be endowed with the ability to provide burdens of proof as well as dialectical arguments, that are not necessarily based on the rationality and validity of proofs. We describe an ongoing project, in whi...
متن کامل