Resum Argumentative debates are a powerful tool for resolving conflicts and reaching agreements in open environments such as on-line communities. Here we introduce an argumentation framework to structure argumentative debates. Our framework represents the arguments issued by the participants involved in a debate, the (attack and defence) relationships between them, as well as participants? opin...

Argumentative debates are a powerful tool for resolving conflicts and reaching agreements in open environments such as on-line communities. Here we introduce an argumentation framework to structure argumentative debates. Our framework represents the arguments issued by the participants involved in a debate, the (attack and defence) relationships between them, as well as participants’ opinions o...

Multi-Agent Systems are suitable to provide a framework that allows to perform collaborative processes in distributed environments. Furthermore, argumentation is a natural way of reaching agreements between several parties. We propose an infrastructure to develop and execute argumentative agents in an open MAS. It offers the tools to develop agents with argumentation capabilities. It also offer...

Learners rarely know how to construct knowledge together in argumentation. This experimental study analyzes two computer-supported collaboration scripts, which should facilitate processes and outcomes of argumentative knowledge construction. One script aims to support the construction of single arguments and the other script aims to support the construction of argumentation sequences. Both scri...

We report on the SUM project which applies automatic summarisation techniques to the legal domain. We pursue a methodology based on Teufel and Moens (2002) where sentences are classified according to their argumentative role. We describe some experiments with judgments of the House of Lords where we have performed automatic linguistic annotation of a small sample set in order to explore correla...

Resum Argumentative debates are a powerful tool for resolving conflicts and reaching agreements in open environments such as on-line communities. Here we introduce an argumentation framework to structure argumentative debates. Our framework represents the arguments issued by the participants involved in a debate, the (attack and defence) relationships between them, as well as participants? opin...

Resum Argumentative debates are a powerful tool for resolving conflicts and reaching agreements in open environments such as on-line communities. Here we introduce an argumentation framework to structure argumentative debates. Our framework represents the arguments issued by the participants involved in a debate, the (attack and defence) relationships between them, as well as participants? opin...

In this paper, the author examines the burden of proof in the argumentative confrontations taking part in practices of political accountability. She does so by explaining how politicians maneuver strategically with the burden of proof in an attempt at winning the discussion in which they are involved. After making clear the role of the burden of proof in defining the difference of opinion in ar...

Resum Argumentative debates are a powerful tool for resolving conflicts and reaching agreements in open environments such as on-line communities. Here we introduce an argumentation framework to structure argumentative debates. Our framework represents the arguments issued by the participants involved in a debate, the (attack and defence) relationships between them, as well as participants? opin...

In this paper, we present a novel approach to model arguments, their components and relations in persuasive essays in English. We propose an annotation scheme that includes the annotation of claims and premises as well as support and attack relations for capturing the structure of argumentative discourse. We further conduct a manual annotation study with three annotators on 90 persuasive essays...