Relating Carneades with Abstract Argumentation
نویسندگان
چکیده
Carneades is a recently proposed formalism for structured argumentation with varying proof standards. An open question is its relation with Dung’s seminal abstract approach to argumentation. In this paper the two formalisms are formally related by translating Carneades into ASPIC, another recently proposed formalism for structured argumentation. Since ASPIC is defined to generate Dungstyle abstract argumentation frameworks, this in effect translates Carneades graphs into abstract argumentation frameworks. It is proven that Carneades always induces a unique Dung extension, which is the same in all of Dung’s semantics.
منابع مشابه
Relating Carneades with abstract argumentation via the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation
Carneades is a recently proposed formalism for structured argumentation with varying proof standards, inspired by legal reasoning but more generally applicable. Its distinctive feature is that each statement can be given its own proof standard, which is claimed to allow a more natural account of reasoning under burden of proof than existing formalisms for structured argumentation, in which proo...
متن کاملThesis for the degree of Master of Science Relating proof standards and abstract argumentation
The basic idea of argumentation is to construct arguments in favour of and against a certain statement, selecting the acceptable arguments, and in the end determining which statements hold. To explain how arguments defend their position, they can be structured by their used knowledge and rules. Several approaches to structured argumentation have been developed and subsequently related through a...
متن کاملA principled approach to the implementation of argumentation models
Argumentation theory combines philosophical concepts and computational models to deliver a practical approach to reasoning that handles uncertain information and possibly conflicting viewpoints. This paper focuses on the structured approach to argumentation that incorporates domain specific knowledge and argumentation schemes. There is a lack of implementations and implementation methods for mo...
متن کاملApplying Recent Argumentation Methods to Some Ancient Examples of Plausible Reasoning
Short Abstract: Eleven characteristics of plausible reasoning are specified by analyzing key examples of it recognized as important in ancient Greek skeptical philosophy using an AI model called the Carneades Argumentation System. In this paper, it is shown that there is a significant connection between the ancient recognition of plausible reasoning by the Greek skeptics and Sophists and the re...
متن کاملThe Carneades Argumentation Framework - Using Presumptions and Exceptions to Model Critical Questions
We present a formal, mathematical model of argument structure and evaluation, called the Carneades Argumentation Framework, which applies proof standards [5] to determine the defensibility of arguments and the acceptability of statements on an issue-by-issue basis. Carneades uses three kinds of premises (ordinary premises, presumptions and exceptions) and information about the dialectical statu...
متن کامل