Algorithms for generating arguments and counterarguments in propositional logic

نویسندگان

  • Vasiliki Efstathiou
  • Anthony Hunter
چکیده

A common assumption for logic-based argumentation is that an argument is a pair 〈Φ, α〉 where Φ is minimal subset of the knowledgebase such that Φ is consistent and Φ entails the claim α. Different logics provide different definitions for consistency and entailment and hence give us different options for formalising arguments and counterarguments. The expressivity of classical propositional logic allows for complicated knowledge to be represented but its computational cost is an issue. In previous work we have proposed addressing this problem using connection graphs and resolution in order to generate arguments for claims that are literals. Here we propose a development of this work to generate arguments for claims that are disjunctive clauses of more than one disjunct, and also to generate counteraguments in the form of canonical undercuts (i.e. arguments that with a claim that is the negation of the conjunction of the support of the argument being undercut).

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

Algorithms for computational argumentation in artificial intelligence

Argumentation is a vital aspect of intelligent behaviour by humans. It provides the means for comparing information by analysing pros and cons when trying to make a decision. Formalising argumentation in computational environment has become a topic of increasing interest in artificial intelligence research over the last decade. Computational argumentation involves reasoning with uncertainty by ...

متن کامل

Contouring of Knowledge for Intelligent Searching for Arguments

A common assumption for logic-based argumentation is that an argument is a pair 〈Φ, α〉 where Φ is a minimal subset of the knowledgebase such that Φ is consistent and Φ entails the claim α. Different logics are based on different definitions for entailment and consistency, and these give us different options for argumentation. For a variety of logics, in particular for classical logic, there is ...

متن کامل

Equality propositional logic and its extensions

We introduce a new formal logic, called equality propositional logic. It has two basic connectives, $boldsymbol{wedge}$ (conjunction) and $equiv$ (equivalence). Moreover, the $Rightarrow$ (implication) connective can be derived as $ARightarrow B:=(Aboldsymbol{wedge}B)equiv A$. We formulate the equality propositional logic and demonstrate that the resulting logic has reasonable properties such a...

متن کامل

Algorithms for Effective Argumentation in Classical Propositional Logic: A Connection Graph Approach

There are a number of frameworks for modelling argumentation in logic. They incorporate a formal representation of individual arguments and techniques for comparing conflicting arguments. A common assumption for logicbased argumentation is that an argument is a pair 〈Φ,α〉 where Φ is minimal subset of the knowledgebase such that Φ is consistent and Φ entails the claim α. Different logics provide...

متن کامل

Inconsistent-tolerant base revision through Argument Theory Change

Reasoning and change over inconsistent knowledge bases (KBs) is of utmost relevance in areas like medicine and law. Argumentation may bring the possibility to cope with both problems. Firstly, by constructing an argumentation framework (AF) from the inconsistent KB, we can decide whether to accept or reject a certain claim through the interplay among arguments and counterarguments. Secondly, by...

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:
  • Int. J. Approx. Reasoning

دوره 52  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2011