On support relations in abstract argumentation as abstractions of inferential relations

نویسنده

  • Henry Prakken
چکیده

Arguably the significance of an abstract model of argumentation depends on the range of realistic instantiations it allows. This paper therefore investigates for three frameworks for abstract argumentation with support relations whether they can be instantiated with the ASPIC framework for structured argumentation. Both evidential argumentation systems and a simple extension of Dung’s abstract frameworks with support relations proposed by Dung & Thang (2014) are shown to allow such an instantiation. However, for bipolar argumentation frameworks a positive result is only obtained for variants with only direct and secondary attacks; counterexamples are provided for variants with supported attacks, even for the special case of deductive support.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Relating ways to instantiate abstract argumentation frameworks

This paper studies the relation between various ways to instantiate Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks. First the ASPIC framework, which explicitly generates abstract argumentation frameworks, is equivalently reformulated in terms of John Pollock’s recursive labelling method, which does not explicitly generate such frameworks. The reformulation arguably facilitates more natural explanatio...

متن کامل

Revisiting Abstract Argumentation Frameworks

This paper argues that many extensions of Dung’s framework incorporating relations additional to binary attacks, are best viewed as abstractions of human rather than computational models of reasoning and debate. The paper then discusses how these additional relations may be reified into object level knowledge, thus enabling reconstruction of the extended framework as a Dung framework, and provi...

متن کامل

An Argumentation System with Indirect Attacks

We discuss argumentation frameworks with indirect attacks, such as why-questions and supports. A whyquestion is regarded as a kind of attack relation, and a support is an answer to an un-presented why-question. Based on this idea, we construct an argumentation framework with why-questions from a pair of knowledge bases, as an instantiation of Dung’s abstract argumentation framework, and show th...

متن کامل

Abstract Argumentation Scheme Frameworks

Argumentation Scheme Frameworks Katie Atkinson and Trevor Bench-Capon Department of Computer Science University of Liverpool Liverpool L69 3BX UK {K.M.Atkinson,tbc}@liverpool.ac.uk Abstract. This paper presents an approach to modelling and reasoning about arguments that exploits and combines two of the most popular mechanisms used within computational modelling of argumentation: argumentation s...

متن کامل

Linked and Convergent Structures in Discourse-Based Reasoning

Explanation and argumentation are fundamental to reasoning. They are therefore of some importance to artificial intelligence. Discourse-based reasoning (DBR) is a knowledge representation technology that uses natural patterns of discourse as a basis for a structural ontology of explanatory and argumentative reasoning. By this means, we may ontologize the reasoning process itself, thus rendering...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2014