A structured argumentation framework for detaching conditional obligations

نویسندگان

  • Mathieu Beirlaen
  • Christian Straßer
چکیده

We present a general formal argumentation system for dealing with the detachment of conditional obligations. Given a set of facts, constraints, and conditional obligations, we answer the question whether an unconditional obligation is detachable by considering reasons for and against its detachment. For the evaluation of arguments in favor of detaching obligations we use a Dung-style argumentation-theoretical semantics. We illustrate the modularity of the general framework by considering some extensions, and we compare the framework to some related approaches from the literature.

برای دانلود رایگان 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

Reasoning 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 کامل

Presenting Software License Conflicts through Argumentation

Heterogeneously-licensed systems pose new challenges to architects and designers seeking to develop systems with appropriate intellectual property rights and obligations. In the extreme case, license conflicts may prevent a system’s legal use. Our previous work showed that rights, obligations, and conflicts can be calculated. But architects benefit from fuller information than simply (for examp...

متن کامل

An ASPIC-based legal argumentation framework for deontic reasoning

In the last years, argumentation theory has been exploited to reason about norms, argue about enforced obligations and permissions, and establish the validity of norms seen as argumentative claims. In this paper, we start from the dynamic legal argumentation framework recently proposed by Prakken and Sartor, and we extend their ASPIC-based system by introducing deontic modalities, to include al...

متن کامل

A Conditional Logic-Based Argumentation Framework

The goal of this paper is twofold. First, a logic-based argumentation framework is introduced in the context of conditional logic, as conditional logic is often regarded as an appealing setting for knowledge representation and reasoning. Second, a concept of conditional contrariety is defined that covers usual inconsistency-based conflicts and puts in light a specific form of conflicts that oft...

متن کامل

Conditional Labelling for Abstract Argumentation

Agents engage in dialogues having as goals to make some arguments acceptable or unacceptable. To do so they may put forward arguments, adding them to the argumentation framework. Argumentation semantics can relate a change in the framework to the resulting extensions but it is not clear, given an argumentation framework and a desired acceptance state for a given set of arguments, which further ...

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

عنوان ژورنال:
  • CoRR

دوره abs/1606.00339  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2016