Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Introduction to the Special Issue.Fabrizio Macagno & Alice Toniolo - 2022 - Informal Logic 43 (3):1-23.
    Douglas Walton’s work is extremely vast, multifaceted, and interdisciplinary. He developed theoretical proposals that have been used in disciplines that are not traditionally related to philosophy, such as law, education, discourse analysis, artificial intelligence, or medical communication. Through his papers and books, Walton redefined the boundaries not only of argumentation theory, but also logic and philosophy. He was a philosopher in the sense that his interest was developing theoretical models that can help explain reality, and more importantly interact with it. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • How to construct Remainder Sets for Paraconsistent Revisions: Preliminary Report.Rafael Testa, Eduardo Fermé, Marco Garapa & Maurício Reis - 2018 - 17th INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON NON-MONOTONIC REASONING.
    Revision operation is the consistent expansion of a theory by a new belief-representing sentence. We consider that in a paraconsistent setting this desideratum can be accomplished in at least three distinct ways: the output of a revision operation should be either non-trivial or non-contradictory (in general or relative to the new belief). In this paper those distinctions will be explored in the constructive level by showing how the remainder sets could be refined, capturing the key concepts of paraconsistency in a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Argumentation schemes in AI and Law.Katie Atkinson & Trevor Bench-Capon - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):417-434.
    In this paper we describe the impact that Walton’s conception of argumentation schemes had on AI and Law research. We will discuss developments in argumentation in AI and Law before Walton’s schemes became known in that community, and the issues that were current in that work. We will then show how Walton’s schemes provided a means of addressing all of those issues, and so supplied a unifying perspective from which to view argumentation in AI and Law.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Dialogue Types, Argumentation Schemes, and Mathematical Practice: Douglas Walton and Mathematics.Andrew Aberdein - 2021 - Journal of Applied Logics 8 (1):159-182.
    Douglas Walton’s multitudinous contributions to the study of argumentation seldom, if ever, directly engage with argumentation in mathematics. Nonetheless, several of the innovations with which he is most closely associated lend themselves to improving our understanding of mathematical arguments. I concentrate on two such innovations: dialogue types (§1) and argumentation schemes (§2). I argue that both devices are much more applicable to mathematical reasoning than may be commonly supposed.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Foundations of an Ethical Framework for AI Entities: the Ethics of Systems.Andrej Dameski - 2020 - Dissertation, University of Luxembourg
    The field of AI ethics during the current and previous decade is receiving an increasing amount of attention from all involved stakeholders: the public, science, philosophy, religious organizations, enterprises, governments, and various organizations. However, this field currently lacks consensus on scope, ethico-philosophical foundations, or common methodology. This thesis aims to contribute towards filling this gap by providing an answer to the two main research questions: first, what theory can explain moral scenarios in which AI entities are participants?; and second, what (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Formal Models of Scientific Inquiry in a Social Context: An Introduction.Dunja Šešelja, Christian Straßer & AnneMarie Borg - 2020 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 51 (2):211-217.
    Formal models of scientific inquiry, aimed at capturing socio-epistemic aspects underlying the process of scientific research, have become an important method in formal social epistemology and philosophy of science. In this introduction to the special issue we provide a historical overview of the development of formal models of this kind and analyze their methodological contributions to discussions in philosophy of science. In particular, we show that their significance consists in different forms of ‘methodological iteration’ whereby the models initiate new lines (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Noise induced hearing loss: Building an application using the ANGELIC methodology.Latifa Al-Abdulkarim, Katie Atkinson, Trevor Bench-Capon, Stuart Whittle, Rob Williams & Catriona Wolfenden - 2018 - Argument and Computation 10 (1):5-22.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Eveline T. Feteris: Fundamentals of legal argumentation: Springer, 2017, 2nd edn, pp. 363.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2018 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 26 (3):307-314.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentation schemes in AI and Law.Fabrizio Macagno - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):417-434.
    In this paper we describe the impact that Walton’s conception of argumentation schemes had on AI and Law research. We will discuss developments in argumentation in AI and Law before Walton’s schemes became known in that community, and the issues that were current in that work. We will then show how Walton’s schemes provided a means of addressing all of those issues, and so supplied a unifying perspective from which to view argumentation in AI and Law.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Thou Shalt Not Squander Life – Comparing Five Approaches to Argument Strength.Simon Wells, Marcin Selinger, David Godden, Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska & Frank Zenker - 2023 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 68 (1):133-167.
    Different approaches analyze the strength of a natural language argument in different ways. This paper contrasts the dialectical, structural, probabilistic (or Bayesian), computational, and empirical approaches by exemplarily applying them to a single argumentative text (Epicureans on Squandering Life; Aikin & Talisse, 2019). Rather than pitching these approaches against one another, our main goal is to show the room for fruitful interaction. Our focus is on a dialectical analysis of the squandering argument as an argumentative response that voids an interlocutor’s (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Assumption-based argumentation for extended disjunctive logic programming and its relation to nonmonotonic reasoning.Toshiko Wakaki - 2024 - Argument and Computation 15 (3):309-353.
    The motivation of this study is that Reiter’s default theory as well as assumption-based argumentation frameworks corresponding to default theories have difficulties in handling disjunctive information, while a disjunctive default theory ( ddt) avoids them. This paper presents the semantic correspondence between generalized assumption-based argumentation (ABA) and extended disjunctive logic programming as well as the correspondence between ABA and nonmonotonic reasoning approaches such as disjunctive default logic and prioritized circumscription. To overcome the above-mentioned difficulties of ABA frameworks corresponding to default (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • When is argumentation deductive?Henry Prakken - 2023 - Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 33 (3-4):212-223.
    1. In May 2013 I had an email exchange with Philippe Besnard, continued in September that year, on his paper with Amgoud and Besnard (2013) and its relevance for the ASPIC+ framework (Modgil & Prak...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Probabilistic interpretations of argumentative attacks: Logical and experimental results.Niki Pfeifer & Christian G. Fermüller - 2023 - Argument and Computation 14 (1):75-107.
    We present an interdisciplinary approach to argumentation combining logical, probabilistic, and psychological perspectives. We investigate logical attack principles which relate attacks among claims with logical form. For example, we consider the principle that an argument that attacks another argument claiming A triggers the existence of an attack on an argument featuring the stronger claim A ∧ B. We formulate a number of such principles pertaining to conjunctive, disjunctive, negated, and implicational claims. Some of these attack principles seem to be prima (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Structured argumentation dynamics: Undermining attacks in default justification logic.Stipe Pandžić - 2022 - Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 90 (2-3):297-337.
    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 that already represents undercutting and rebutting attacks, and we add undermining attacks. Intuitively, undermining does not target default inference, as undercutting, or default conclusion, as rebutting, but rather attacks an argument’s premise as a starting point for default reasoning. In default justification logic, reasoning starts from a set of premises, which is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A logic of defeasible argumentation: Constructing arguments in justification logic.Stipe Pandžić - 2022 - Argument and Computation 13 (1):3-47.
    In the 1980s, Pollock’s work on default reasons started the quest in the AI community for a formal system of defeasible argumentation. The main goal of this paper is to provide a logic of structured defeasible arguments using the language of justification logic. In this logic, we introduce defeasible justification assertions of the type t : F that read as “t is a defeasible reason that justifies F”. Such formulas are then interpreted as arguments and their acceptance semantics is given (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Law and logic: A review from an argumentation perspective.Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor - 2015 - Artificial Intelligence 227 (C):214-245.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Theory of Semi-Instantiation in Abstract Argumentation.D. M. Gabbay - 2016 - Logica Universalis 10 (4):431-516.
    We study instantiated abstract argumentation frames of the form, where is an abstract argumentation frame and where the arguments x of S are instantiated by I as well formed formulas of a well known logic, for example as Boolean formulas or as predicate logic formulas or as modal logic formulas. We use the method of conceptual analysis to derive the properties of our proposed system. We seek to define the notion of complete extensions for such systems and provide algorithms for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Bisimulation between base argumentation and premise-conclusion argumentation.Jinsheng Chen, Beishui Liao & Leendert van der Torre - 2024 - Artificial Intelligence 336 (C):104203.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies.Livio Robaldo, Sotiris Batsakis, Roberta Calegari, Francesco Calimeri, Megumi Fujita, Guido Governatori, Maria Concetta Morelli, Francesco Pacenza, Giuseppe Pisano, Ken Satoh, Ilias Tachmazidis & Jessica Zangari - 2024 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 32 (2):505-555.
    This paper analyses and compares some of the automated reasoners that have been used in recent research for compliance checking. Although the list of the considered reasoners is not exhaustive, we believe that our analysis is representative enough to take stock of the current state of the art in the topic. We are interested here in formalizations at the _first-order_ level. Past literature on normative reasoning mostly focuses on the _propositional_ level. However, the propositional level is of little usefulness for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Comparing logic programming and formal argumentation; the case of ideal and eager semantics.Martin Caminada, Sri Harikrishnan & Samy Sá - 2022 - Argument and Computation 13 (1):93-120.
    The connection between logic programming and formal argumentation has been studied starting from the landmark 1995 paper of Dung. Subsequent work has identified a standard translation from logic programs to argumentation frameworks, under which pairwise correspondences hold between various logic programming semantics and various formal argumentation semantics. This includes the correspondence between 3-valued stable and complete semantics, between well-founded and grounded semantics and between 2-valued stable and stable semantics. In the current paper, we show that the existing translation is able (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentation Analytics for Treatment Deliberations in Multimorbidity Cases: An Introduction to Two Artificial Intelligence Approaches.Douglas Walton, Tiago Oliveira, Ken Satoh & Waleed Mebane - 2020 - Topoi 40 (2):373-386.
    Multimorbidity, the presence of multiple health conditions that must be addressed, is a particularly difficult situation in patient management raising issues such as the use of multiple drugs and drug-disease interactions. Clinical Guidelines are evidence-based statements which provide recommendations for specific health conditions but are unfit for the management of multiple co-occurring health situations. To leverage these evidence-based documents, it becomes necessary to combine them. In this paper, using a case example, we explore the use of argumentation schemes to reason (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Arguing about causes in law: a semi-formal framework for causal arguments.Rūta Liepiņa, Giovanni Sartor & Adam Wyner - 2020 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 28 (1):69-89.
    Disputes over causes play a central role in legal argumentation and liability attribution. Legal approaches to causation often struggle to capture cause-in-fact in complex situations, e.g. overdetermination, preemption, omission. In this paper, we first assess three current theories of causation to illustrate their strengths and weaknesses in capturing cause-in-fact. Secondly, we introduce a semi-formal framework for modelling causal arguments through strict and defeasible rules. Thirdly, the framework is applied to the Althen vaccine injury case. And lastly, we discuss the need (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • An Argumentation‐Based Analysis of the Simonshaven Case.Henry Prakken - 2020 - Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (4):1068-1091.
    Prakken gives an argumentation‐based analysis of the manslaughter case using logical tools developed in AI. Prakken regards evidential argumentation as the construction and attack of ‘trees of inference’ from evidence to conclusions by applying generalizations. He argues that this approach clearly shows how evidence and hypotheses relate and what are the points of disagreement, but that it cannot give a clear overview over a case and lacks a systematic account of degrees of uncertainty.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • A new use case for argumentation support tools: supporting discussions of Bayesian analyses of complex criminal cases.Henry Prakken - 2020 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 28 (1):27-49.
    In this paper a new use case for legal argumentation support tools is considered: supporting discussions about analyses of complex criminal cases with the help of Bayesian probability theory. By way of a case study, two actual discussions between experts in court cases are analysed on their argumentation structure. In this study the usefulness of several recognised argument schemes is confirmed, a new argument scheme for arguments from statistics are proposed, and an analysis is given of debates between experts about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Experimental evaluation of gradual argument acceptability semantics: The case of reinstatement.Elfia Bezou Vrakatseli, Henry Prakken & Christian P. Janssen - 2024 - Argument and Computation:1-25.
    This paper investigates whether empirical findings on how humans evaluate arguments in reinstatement cases support the ‘fewer attackers is better’ principle, incorporated in many current gradual notions of argument acceptability. Through three variations of an experiment, we find that (1) earlier findings that reinstated arguments are rated lower than when presented alone are replicated, (2) ratings at the reinstated stage are similar if all arguments are presented at once, compared to sequentially, and (3) ratings are overall higher if participants are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • An abstract and structured account of dialectical argument strength.Henry Prakken - 2024 - Artificial Intelligence 335 (C):104193.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Lakatos-style collaborative mathematics through dialectical, structured and abstract argumentation.Alison Pease, John Lawrence, Katarzyna Budzynska, Joseph Corneli & Chris Reed - 2017 - Artificial Intelligence 246 (C):181-219.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • GORGIAS: Applying argumentation.Antonis C. Kakas, Pavlos Moraitis & Nikolaos I. Spanoudakis - 2018 - Argument and Computation 10 (1):55-81.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • HYPO's legacy: introduction to the virtual special issue.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2017 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 25 (2):205-250.
    This paper is an introduction to a virtual special issue of AI and Law exploring the legacy of the influential HYPO system of Rissland and Ashley. The papers included are: Arguments and cases: An inevitable intertwining, BankXX: Supporting legal arguments through heuristic retrieval, Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue Game, A note on dimensions and factors, An empirical investigation of reasoning with legal cases through theory construction and application, Automatically classifying case texts and predicting outcomes, A factor-based definition (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • The Argument Web: an Online Ecosystem of Tools, Systems and Services for Argumentation.Mark Snaith, Alison Pease, John Lawrence, Barbara Konat, Mathilde Janier, Rory Duthie, Katarzyna Budzynska & Chris Reed - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (2):137-160.
    The Argument Web is maturing as both a platform built upon a synthesis of many contemporary theories of argumentation in philosophy and also as an ecosystem in which various applications and application components are contributed by different research groups around the world. It already hosts the largest publicly accessible corpora of argumentation and has the largest number of interoperable and cross compatible tools for the analysis, navigation and evaluation of arguments across a broad range of domains, languages and activity types. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • M-LAMAC: a model for linguistic assessment of mitigating and aggravating circumstances of criminal responsibility using computing with words.Carlos Rafael Rodríguez Rodríguez, Yarina Amoroso Fernández, Denis Sergeevich Zuev, Marieta Peña Abreu & Yeleny Zulueta Veliz - 2024 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 32 (3):697-739.
    The general mitigating and aggravating circumstances of criminal liability are elements attached to the crime that, when they occur, affect the punishment quantum. Cuban criminal legislation provides a catalog of such circumstances and some general conditions for their application. Such norms give judges broad discretion in assessing circumstances and adjusting punishment based on the intensity of those circumstances. In the interest of broad judicial discretion, the law does not establish specific ways for measuring circumstances’ intensity. This gives judges more freedom (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Revisiting initial sets in abstract argumentation.Matthias Thimm - 2022 - Argument and Computation 13 (3):325-360.
    We revisit the notion of initial sets by Xu and Cayrol 2016), i. e., non-empty minimal admissible sets in abstract argumentation frameworks. Initial sets are a simple concept for analysing conflicts in an abstract argumentation framework and to explain why certain arguments can be accepted. We contribute with new insights on the structure of initial sets and devise a simple non-deterministic construction principle for any admissible set, based on iterative selection of initial sets of the original framework and its induced (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A Structured Argumentation Framework for Modeling Debates in the Formal Sciences.Marcos Cramer & Jérémie Dauphin - 2020 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 51 (2):219-241.
    Scientific research in the formal sciences comes in multiple degrees of formality: fully formal work; rigorous proofs that practitioners know to be formalizable in principle; and informal work like rough proof sketches and considerations about the advantages and disadvantages of various formal systems. This informal work includes informal and semi-formal debates between formal scientists, e.g. about the acceptability of foundational principles and proposed axiomatizations. In this paper, we propose to use the methodology of structured argumentation theory to produce a formal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Probabilistic Argumentation: An Equational Approach.D. M. Gabbay & O. Rodrigues - 2015 - Logica Universalis 9 (3):345-382.
    There is a generic way to add any new feature to a system. It involves identifying the basic units which build up the system and introducing the new feature to each of these basic units. In the case where the system is argumentation and the feature is probabilistic we have the following. The basic units are: the nature of the arguments involved; the membership relation in the set S of arguments; the attack relation; and the choice of extensions. Generically to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Sequent-based logical argumentation.Ofer Arieli & Christian Straßer - 2015 - Argument and Computation 6 (1):73-99.
    We introduce a general approach for representing and reasoning with argumentation-based systems. In our framework arguments are represented by Gentzen-style sequents, attacks between arguments are represented by sequent elimination rules, and deductions are made according to Dung-style skeptical or credulous semantics. This framework accommodates different languages and logics in which arguments may be represented, allows for a flexible and simple way of expressing and identifying arguments, supports a variety of attack relations, and is faithful to standard methods of drawing conclusions (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Assumption-based argumentation with preferences and goals for patient-centric reasoning with interacting clinical guidelines.Kristijonas Čyras, Tiago Oliveira, Amin Karamlou & Francesca Toni - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (2):149-189.
    A paramount, yet unresolved issue in personalised medicine is that of automated reasoning with clinical guidelines in multimorbidity settings. This entails enabling machines to use computerised generic clinical guideline recommendations and patient-specific information to yield patient-tailored recommendations where interactions arising due to multimorbidities are resolved. This problem is further complicated by patient management desiderata, in particular the need to account for patient-centric goals as well as preferences of various parties involved. We propose to solve this problem of automated reasoning with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • An experimental analysis on the similarity of argumentation semantics.Federico Cerutti, Matthias Thimm & Mauro Vallati - 2020 - Argument and Computation 11 (3):269-304.
    In this paper we ask whether approximation for abstract argumentation is useful in practice, and in particular whether reasoning with grounded semantics – which has polynomial runtime – is already an approximation approach sufficient for several practical purposes. While it is clear from theoretical results that reasoning with grounded semantics is different from, for example, skeptical reasoning with preferred semantics, we investigate how significant this difference is in actual argumentation frameworks. As it turns out, in many graphs models, reasoning with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • In memoriam Douglas N. Walton: the influence of Doug Walton on AI and law.Katie Atkinson, Trevor Bench-Capon, Floris Bex, Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken, Giovanni Sartor & Bart Verheij - 2020 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 28 (3):281-326.
    Doug Walton, who died in January 2020, was a prolific author whose work in informal logic and argumentation had a profound influence on Artificial Intelligence, including Artificial Intelligence and Law. He was also very interested in interdisciplinary work, and a frequent and generous collaborator. In this paper seven leading researchers in AI and Law, all past programme chairs of the International Conference on AI and Law who have worked with him, describe his influence on their work.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Before and after Dung: Argumentation in AI and Law.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2020 - Argument and Computation 11 (1-2):221-238.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The attack as intuitionistic negation.D. Gabbay & M. Gabbay - 2016 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 24 (5):807-837.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • A top-level model of case-based argumentation for explanation: Formalisation and experiments.Henry Prakken & Rosa Ratsma - 2022 - Argument and Computation 13 (2):159-194.
    This paper proposes a formal top-level model of explaining the outputs of machine-learning-based decision-making applications and evaluates it experimentally with three data sets. The model draws on AI & law research on argumentation with cases, which models how lawyers draw analogies to past cases and discuss their relevant similarities and differences in terms of relevant factors and dimensions in the problem domain. A case-based approach is natural since the input data of machine-learning applications can be seen as cases. While the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Acquiring knowledge from expert agents in a structured argumentation setting.Ramiro Andres Agis, Sebastian Gottifredi & Alejandro Javier García - 2019 - Argument and Computation 10 (2):149-189.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Argumentation frameworks with necessities and their relationship with logic programs.Farid Nouioua & Sara Boutouhami - 2023 - Argument and Computation 14 (1):17-58.
    This paper presents a comprehensive study of argumentation frameworks with necessities (AFNs), a bipolar extension of Dung Abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) where the support relation captures a positive interaction between arguments having the meaning of necessity: the acceptance of an argument may require the acceptance of other argument(s). The paper discusses new main acceptability semantics for AFNs and their characterization both by a direct approach and a labelling approach. It examines the relationship between AFNs and Dung AFs and shows the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Computational complexity of flat and generic Assumption-Based Argumentation, with and without probabilities.Kristijonas Čyras, Quentin Heinrich & Francesca Toni - 2021 - Artificial Intelligence 293 (C):103449.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Before and after Dung: Argumentation in AI and Law.Francesca Toni - 2020 - Argument and Computation 11 (1-2):221-238.
    Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks have had a very significant role in the rise in interest in argumentation throughout this century. In this paper we will explore the impact of this seminal...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • An informant-based approach to argument strength in Defeasible Logic Programming.Gabriella Pigozzi & Srdjan Vesic - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (1):115-147.
    This work formalizes an informant-based structured argumentation approach in a multi-agent setting, where the knowledge base of an agent may include information provided by other agents, and each piece of knowledge comes attached with its informant. In that way, arguments are associated with the set of informants corresponding to the information they are built upon. Our approach proposes an informant-based notion of argument strength, where the strength of an argument is determined by the credibility of its informant agents. Moreover, we (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A computational model of argumentation schemes for multi-agent systems.Fabrizio Macagno - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):357-395.
    There are many benefits of using argumentation-based techniques in multi-agent systems, as clearly shown in the literature. Such benefits come not only from the expressiveness that argumentation-based techniques bring to agent communication but also from the reasoning and decision-making capabilities under conditions of conflicting and uncertain information that argumentation enables for autonomous agents. When developing multi-agent applications in which argumentation will be used to improve agent communication and reasoning, argumentation schemes (reasoning patterns for argumentation) are useful in addressing the requirements (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the first decade. [REVIEW]Guido Governatori, Trevor Bench-Capon, Bart Verheij, Michał Araszkiewicz, Enrico Francesconi & Matthias Grabmair - 2022 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 30 (4):481-519.
    The first issue of _Artificial Intelligence and Law_ journal was published in 1992. This paper provides commentaries on landmark papers from the first decade of that journal. The topics discussed include reasoning with cases, argumentation, normative reasoning, dialogue, representing legal knowledge and neural networks.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Acceptance in incomplete argumentation frameworks.Dorothea Baumeister, Matti Järvisalo, Daniel Neugebauer, Andreas Niskanen & Jörg Rothe - 2021 - Artificial Intelligence 295 (C):103470.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Deductive and abductive argumentation based on information graphs.Remi Wieten, Floris Bex, Henry Prakken & Silja Renooij - 2022 - Argument and Computation 13 (1):49-91.
    In this paper, we propose an argumentation formalism that allows for both deductive and abductive argumentation, where ‘deduction’ is used as an umbrella term for both defeasible and strict ‘forward’ inference. Our formalism is based on an extended version of our previously proposed information graph formalism, which provides a precise account of the interplay between deductive and abductive inference and causal and evidential information. In the current version, we consider additional types of information such as abstractions which allow domain experts (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark