Argumentation Semantics as Formal Discussion
نویسنده
چکیده
In the current review paper, we provide an overview of how mainstream argumentation semantics can be interpreted in terms of structured discussion. The idea is that an argument is justified according to a particular argumentation semantics iff it is possible to win a discussion of a particular type. Hence, different argumentation semantics correspond to different types of discussion. Our aim is to provide an overview of what these discussions look like, and their formal correspondence to argumentation semantics.
منابع مشابه
An implementation of argument based discussion
With the current demonstrator, we present an implementation of formal argumentation that is not only able to evaluate an argument according to standard argumentation semantics, but is also able to engage in a discussion to defend its answer. This discussion is formal yet natural enough to be applicable in agent-to-agent as well as in agent-to-human settings.
متن کاملArgumentation semantics of communicative action
Communication is a process aimed at agreement on some situation definition. When the agreement is not immediate, a discussion is needed to resolve the points of disagreement using argumentation. Although such a discussion is recognized in the LAP approaches, no formal treatment of it has been given so far. In this paper, we introduce a formal model based on recent results from argumentation the...
متن کاملComputing Science On the Equivalence between Logic Programming Semantics and Argumentation Semantics
In the current paper, we re-examine the connection between formal argumentation and logic programming from the perspective of semantics. We observe that one particular translation from logic programs to instantiated argumentation (the one described by Wu, Caminada and Gabbay) is able to serve as a basis for describing various equivalences between logic programming semantics and argumentation se...
متن کاملArgueApply: A Mobile App for Argumentation
Formal models developed in the field of argumentation allow for analysing and evaluating problems that have previously been studied by philosophers on an informal level only. Importantly, they also give rise to the development of computational tools for argumentation. In this paper we report on ArgueApply, a mobile app for argumentation that is based on the Grappa framework, an extension of, e....
متن کاملOn the Equivalence between Logic Programming Semantics and Argumentation Semantics
In the current paper, we re-examine the connection between formal argumentation and logic programming from the perspective of semantics. We observe that one particular translation from logic programs to instantiated argumentation (the one described by Wu, Caminada and Gabbay) is able to serve as a basis for describing various equivalences between logic programming semantics and argumentation se...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2017