Argumentation Databases
نویسنده
چکیده
We introduce a proposal to give argumentation capacity to databases. A database is said to have argumentation capacity if it can extract from the information available to it a set of interacting arguments for and against claims and to determine the overall status of some information given all the interactions among all the arguments. We represent conflicts among arguments using a construct called a contestation, which permits us to represent various degrees of conflicts among statements. Argumentation databases as proposed here give exactly the same answers to queries as a database without argumentation capacity, but which are annotated with confidence values reflecting the degree of confidence one should have in the answer, where the degree of confidence is determined by the overall effect of all the interactions among the arguments.
منابع مشابه
Defeasible argumentation over relational databases
Defeasible argumentation has been applied successfully in several real-world domains in which it is necessary to handle incomplete and contradictory information. In recent years, there have been interesting attempts to carry out argumentation processes supported by massive repositories developing argumentative reasoning applications. One of such efforts builds arguments by retrieving informatio...
متن کاملCredulous argumentation with the disjunctive stable semantics
The relationship between the disjunctive stable semantics and argumentation is rarely explored. In particular, the problem of how to perform argumentation with disjunctive logic programs by the disjunctive stable semantics is still open. This paper attempts to address this problem and a satisfied solution is provided, in which a disjunctive logic program is naturally transformed into an argumen...
متن کاملIncorporating Classical Logic Argumentation into Policy-based Inconsistency Management in Relational Databases
Inconsistency management policies allow a relational database user to express customized ways for managing inconsistency according to his need. For each functional dependency, a user has a library of applicable policies, each of them with constraints, requirements, and preferences for their application, that can contradict each other. The problem that we address in this work is that of determin...
متن کاملProviding Informational Support for Argumentation: The ISA Project
This paper briefly presents the ISA project that addresses the issue of how argumentation processes can be supported by providing textual information from document databases. The conceptual integration of dataand knowledgebased technologies with discussion forums is illustrated, and the preliminary works for indexing documents as well as for providing search mechanism are presented.
متن کاملOn the theory of argumentation frameworks
argumentation has been developed in a theoretical way, in noteworthy works such as [Tou58], [Fel84], [Dun95], [KT96], [BDKT97], [KMD94], [Pol94], [Vre97], [PS96a], [PS97], and [Ver96]. Argumentation-theoretic interpretations and proof-procedures are applicable in practical reasoning, legal reasoning ([KT96], [PS95]), mediation systems ([GK96], [BG94]), decision-making systems ([KPG96]), and are...
متن کامل