Dialectical Frameworks Revisited∗ Gerhard Brewka and Stefan Ellmauthaler and Hannes Strass Institute of Computer Science, Leipzig University Johannes Peter Wallner and Stefan Woltran Institute of Information Systems, Vienna University of Technology

This paper develops concepts and procedures for the evaluation of complex debates. They provide means for answering such questions as whether a thesis has to be considered as proven or disproven in a debate or who carries a burden of proof. While being based on classical logic, this framework represents an (argument-based) approach to non-monotonic, or defeasible reasoning. Debates are analysed...

Problem solving is a key activity for any innovative company. As the dialectical approach has shown its efficiency in problem solving, the starting point of our work is the use of contradiction in problem formulation stage. In this article, we analyse the possibility to use information brought by a Design of Experiments (DoE) to formulate a contradiction. Constraint Satisfaction Problem is empl...

In this article the author develops a framework for a pragma-dialectical reconstruction of teleological argumentation in a legal context. Ideas taken from legal theory are integrated in a pragma-dialectical model for analyzing and evaluating argumentation, thus providing a more systematic and elaborate framework for assessing the quality of teleological arguments in a legal context. Teleologica...

We propose a dialectical argumentation formalism for qualitative reasoning under uncertainty in a context of alternative scenarios. Our formalism extends prior work representing knowledge uncertainty using dialectical argumentation in participant interaction spaces called Agoras. We define the notion of a scenario in this framework and consider its formal properties. In particular, we ask when ...

The Vowel Agent Argumentation Architecture (V3A) is an abstract model by means of which an autonomous agent argues with itself to manage its motivations and arbitrate its possible internal conflicts. We propose an argumentation technique which specifies the internal dialectical process and a dialogue-game amongst internal components which can dynamically join/leave the game, thus having the pot...

We present a variant of AB-dispute derivations for assumption-based argumentation (ABA), that can be used for determining the admissibility of claims. ABA reduces the problem of computing arguments to the problem of computing assumptions supporting these arguments. Whereas the original AB-dispute derivations only manipulate sets of assumptions, our variant also renders explicit the underlying d...