The Argument Interchange Format (AIF) has been devised in order to support the interchange of ideas and data between different projects and applications in the area of computational argumentation. In order to support such interchange, an abstract ontology for argumentation is presented, which serves as an interlingua between various more concrete argumentation languages. In this paper, we aim t...

Building ontologies has been proven to be a complex issue in part because a community must commit to the conceptualization that the ontology represents. The community members must align their concepts and co-create. Arguing about a useful conceptualization is therefore an essential part of the process of designing an ontology. Logicians have developed formal argumentation theories, but have not...

The myside bias in written argumentation entails excluding other side information from essays. To determine the locus of the bias, 86 Experiment 1 participants were assigned to argue either for or against their preferred side of a proposal. Participants were given either balanced or unrestricted research instructions. Balanced research instructions significantly increased the use of other side ...

Defeasible reasoning is a simple but efficient rule-based approach to nonmonotonic reasoning. It haspowerful implementations and shows promise to be applied in the areas of legal reasoning and themodeling of business rules. This paper establishes significant links between defeasible reasoning andargumentation. In particular, Dung-like argumentation semantics is provided for two key ...

Abstract This paper develops a logical theory that unifies all three standard types of argumentative attack in AI, namely rebutting, undercutting and undermining attacks. We build on default justification logic already represents rebutting attacks, we add Intuitively, does not target inference, as undercutting, or conclusion, but rather attacks an argument’s premise starting point for reasoning...

Different agents within a multiagent system (MAS) potentially have access to different information and different capabilities (including reasoning capabilities), different beliefs about the world, different preferences, constraints, and desires, and different goals. A key aspect of the scientific and engineering study of multiagent systems, therefore, has been the development of methods and pro...

An abstract argumentation framework and the semantics, often called Dungean semantics, give a general framework for nonmonotonic logics. In the last fifteen years, a great number of papers in computational argumentation adopt Dungean semantics as a fundamental principle for evaluating various kinds of defeasible consequences. Recently, many papers address problems not only with theoretical reas...

Argumentation has played a significant role in understanding and unifying under a common framework different forms of defeasible reasoning in Artificial Intelligence (AI). Argumentation is also close to the original inception of logic as a framework for formalizing human debate and dialogue. The purpose of this paper is to draw a formal connection between argumentation and classical reasoning, ...

In existing literature, little attention has been paid to the problems of how the uncertainty reflected by natural language text (e.g. verbal and linguistic uncertainty) can be explicitly formulated in argumentation schemes, and how argumentation schemes enriched with various types of uncertainty can be exploited to support argumentation mining and evaluation. In this paper, we focus on the fir...