Clarifying some misconceptions on the ASPIC+ framework
نویسندگان
چکیده
The ASPIC+ framework is a general framework for argumentationbased inference which aims to unifies two research strands: those in which arguments can only be attacked on their defeasible inferences and those in which arguments can only be attacked on their premises. The framework is meant to define a wide class of instantiations of abstract argumentation frameworks and to support the investigation of rationality postulates for argumentation-based inference. Recently, it has been argued that the ASPIC+ framework suffers from several weaknesses. In this paper these criticisms are argued to be based on a number of misconceptions on the nature of the ASPIC+ framework.
منابع مشابه
Abstract Rule-Based Argumentation
Rule-Based Argumentation Sanjay Modgil, Henry Prakken abstract. This chapter reviews abstract rule-based approaches to argumentation, in particular the ASPIC framework. In ASPIC and its This chapter reviews abstract rule-based approaches to argumentation, in particular the ASPIC framework. In ASPIC and its predecessors, going back to the seminal work of John Pollock, arguments can be formed by ...
متن کاملThe ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation: a tutorial
This article gives a tutorial introduction to the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation. The philosophical and conceptual underpinnings of ASPIC+are discussed, the main definitions are illustrated with examples and several ways are discussed to instantiate the framework and to reconstruct other approaches as special cases of the framework. The ASPIC+ framework is based on two ideas: the...
متن کاملBringing relationships into consumer decision-making
The primary purpose of our target article was to stimulate further interest in and research on consumer decision-making in close relationships. In this response, we discuss some of the major comments provided by each set of commentators by highlighting their main points, clarifying some misconceptions, and explaining why our dyadic framework is a logical starting-point for research on how relat...
متن کاملReasoning about Preferences in Structured Extended Argumentation Frameworks
This paper combines two recent extensions of Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks in order to define an abstract formalism for reasoning about preferences in structured argumentation frameworks. First, extended argumentation frameworks extend Dung frameworks with attacks on attacks, thus providing an abstract dialectical semantics that accommodates argumentation-based reasoning about prefer...
متن کاملRelating 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