In this paper we show that some versions of Dung’s abstract argumentation frames are equivalent to classical propositional logic. In fact, Dung’s attack relation is none other than the generalised Peirce– Quine dagger connective of classical logic which can generate the other connectives ¬,∧,∨,→ of classical logic. After establishing the above correspondence we offer variations of the Dung argu...

This paper discusses two recent developments in the formal study of argumentation-based inference: work on preference-based abstract argumentation and on classical (deductive) argumentation. It is first argued that general models of the use of preferences in argumentation cannot leave the structure of arguments and the nature of attack and defeat unspecified. Then it is claimed that classical a...

This paper studies an abduction problem in formal argumentation frameworks. Given an argument, an agent verifies whether the argument is justified or not in its argumentation framework. If the argument is not justified, the agent seeks conditions to explain the argument in its argumentation framework. We formulate such abductive reasoning in argumentation semantics and provide its computation i...

The fundamental mechanism that humans use in argumentation can be formalized in abstract argumentation frameworks. Many semantics are associated with abstract argumentation frameworks, each one consisting of a set of extensions, that is, a set of sets of arguments. Some of these semantics are based on preference relations that essentially impose to maximize or minimize some property. This paper...

2 Looking Ahead 3 2.1 Argumentation and the Semantic Web . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1.1 The Semantic Web . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1.2 Research Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Argumentation and Decision Support in Application Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2.1 Autonomous Agents . . ....

The paper introduces a number of propositional argumentation systems obtained by gradually extending the underlying language and associated monotonic logics. An assumption-based argumentation framework [Bondarenko et al., 1997] will constitute a special case of this construction. In addition, a stronger argumentation system in a full classical language will be shown to be equivalent to a system...

Most formal approaches to argumentative reasoning focus on the analysis of qualitative aspects. An exeption is the framework of probabilistic argumentation systems. Its philosophy is to include both qualitative and quantitative aspects of argumentation through a simple way of combining logic and probability theory. Probabilities are used to weigh arguments for and against a particular conclusio...

This paper examines the Argumentation Negotiation of agent as a mechanism for solving the course-scheduling problem. We integrated multi-agent automatic negotiation mechanism and argumentation reasoning to apply in course scheduling problem. We want to evolve the belief of the agents by argumentation-based negotiation, so that agents can have more information of the environment, and select bett...

Argumentation is omnipresent in our lives and therefore an important skill to learn. While classic face-to-face argumentation and debate has advantages in helping people learn to argue better, it does not scale up, limited by teacher time and availability. Computer-supported argumentation (CSA) is a viable alternative in learning to argue, currently increasing in popularity. In this paper, we p...

The basic idea of argumentation is to construct arguments in favour of and against a certain statement, selecting the acceptable arguments, and in the end determining which statements hold. To explain how arguments defend their position, they can be structured by their used knowledge and rules. Several approaches to structured argumentation have been developed and subsequently related through a...