Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Elements of Argumentation.Philippe Besnard & Anthony Hunter - 2009 - Studia Logica 93 (1):97-103.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • Introduction to structured argumentation.Philippe Besnard, Alejandro Garcia, Anthony Hunter, Sanjay Modgil, Henry Prakken, Guillermo Simari & Francesca Toni - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (1):1-4.
    In abstract argumentation, each argument is regarded as atomic. There is no internal structure to an argument. Also, there is no specification of what is an argument or an attack. They are assumed to be given. This abstract perspective provides many advantages for studying the nature of argumentation, but it does not cover all our needs for understanding argumentation or for building tools for supporting or undertaking argumentation. If we want a more detailed formalization of arguments than is available with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning.Douglas Neil Walton & Erik C. W. Krabbe - 1995 - Albany, NY, USA: State University of New York Press.
    Develops a logical analysis of dialogue in which two or more parties attempt to advance their own interests. It includes a classification of the major types of dialogues and a discussion of several important informal fallacies.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   385 citations  
  • The Raft and the Pyramid: Coherence versus Foundations in the Theory of Knowledge.Ernest Sosa - 1980 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 5 (1):3-26.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   176 citations  
  • Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning.Douglas N. Walton - 1996 - Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
    This book identifies 25 argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning and matches a set of critical questions to each.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   242 citations  
  • A survey of non-prioritized belief revision.Sven Ove Hansson - 1999 - Erkenntnis 50 (2-3):413-427.
    This paper summarizes and systematizes recent and ongoing work on non-prioritized belief change, i.e., belief revision in which the new information has no special priority due to its novelty.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   46 citations  
  • What is reasoning? What is an argument?Douglas N. Walton - 1990 - Journal of Philosophy 87 (8):399-419.
    In redefining logic, philosophers need to go back to the Aristotelian roots of the subject, to expand the boundaries of the subject to include informal logic and to give up false oppositions between informal and formal logic.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   108 citations  
  • (1 other version)On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions.Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors & David Makinson - 1985 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (2):510-530.
    This paper extends earlier work by its authors on formal aspects of the processes of contracting a theory to eliminate a proposition and revising a theory to introduce a proposition. In the course of the earlier work, Gardenfors developed general postulates of a more or less equational nature for such processes, whilst Alchourron and Makinson studied the particular case of contraction functions that are maximal, in the sense of yielding a maximal subset of the theory (or alternatively, of one of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   748 citations  
  • Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties.Nikos Gorogiannis & Anthony Hunter - 2011 - Artificial Intelligence 175 (9-10):1479-1497.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  • Handbook of Knowledge Representation.Frank Van Harmelen, Vladimir Lifschitz & Bruce Porter - 2008 - Elsevier.
    Knowledge representation, which lies at the core of artificial intelligence, is concerned with encoding knowledge on computers to enable systems to reason automatically. The aims are to help readers make their computer smarter, handle qualitative and uncertain information, and improve computational tractability.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • (1 other version)Non-monotonic Logic.Christian Strasser & G. Aldo Antonelli - 2014 - In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford, CA: The Metaphysics Research Lab.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Constraints and changes: A survey of abstract argumentation dynamics.Sylvie Doutre & Jean-Guy Mailly - 2018 - Argument and Computation 9 (3):223-248.
    This paper addresses the issue of the dynamic enforcement of a constraint in an argumentation system. The system consists in (1) an argumentation framework, made up, notably, of a set of arguments...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Extending the Harper Identity to Iterated Belief Change.Jake Chandler & Richard Booth - 2016 - In Subbarao Kambhampati (ed.), Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI). Palo Alto, USA: AAAI Press / International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence.
    The field of iterated belief change has focused mainly on revision, with the other main operator of AGM belief change theory, i.e. contraction, receiving relatively little attention. In this paper we extend the Harper Identity from single-step change to define iterated contraction in terms of iterated revision. Specifically, just as the Harper Identity provides a recipe for defining the belief set resulting from contracting A in terms of (i) the initial belief set and (ii) the belief set resulting from revision (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Two Dogmas of Belief Revision.Hans Rott - 2000 - Journal of Philosophy 97 (9):503.
    The paper attacks the widely held view that belief revision theories, as they have been studied in the past two decades, are founded on the Principle of Informational Economy. The principle comes in two versions. According to the first, an agent should, when accepting a new piece of information, aim at a minimal change of his previously held beliefs. If there are different ways to effect the belief change, then the agent should, according to he second version, give up those (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   40 citations  
  • (1 other version)Non monotonic reasoning and belief revision: syntactic, semantic, foundational and coherence approaches.Alvaro del Val - 1997 - Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7 (1-2):213-240.
    ABSTRACT The major approaches to belief revision and non monotonic reasoning proposed in the literature differ along a number of dimensions, including whether they are “syntax- based” or “semantic-based”, “foundational” or “coherentist”, “consistence-restoring” or “inconsistency-tolerant”. Our contribution towards clarifying the connections between these various approaches is threefold: •We show that the two main approaches to belief revision, the foundations and coherence theories, are mathematically equivalent, thus answering a question left open in [Gar90, Doy92], The distinction between syntax-based approaches to revision (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • An Epistemic Approach to Conditionals.Peter Gärdenfors - 1981 - American Philosophical Quarterly 18 (3):203 - 211.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  • On the logic of iterated belief revision.Adnan Darwiche & Judea Pearl - 1997 - Artificial Intelligence 89 (1-2):1-29.
    We show in this paper that the AGM postulates are too weak to ensure the rational preservation of conditional beliefs during belief revision, thus permitting improper responses to sequences of observations. We remedy this weakness by proposing four additional postulates, which are sound relative to a qualitative version of probabilistic conditioning. Contrary to the AGM framework, the proposed postulates characterize belief revision as a process which may depend on elements of an epistemic state that are not necessarily captured by a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   142 citations  
  • Argumentation schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno.
    This book provides a systematic analysis of many common argumentation schemes and a compendium of 96 schemes. The study of these schemes, or forms of argument that capture stereotypical patterns of human reasoning, is at the core of argumentation research. Surveying all aspects of argumentation schemes from the ground up, the book takes the reader from the elementary exposition in the first chapter to the latest state of the art in the research efforts to formalize and classify the schemes, outlined (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   281 citations  
  • Defeasible Reasoning.John L. Pollock - 1987 - Cognitive Science 11 (4):481-518.
    There was a long tradition in philosophy according to which good reasoning had to be deductively valid. However, that tradition began to be questioned in the 1960’s, and is now thoroughly discredited. What caused its downfall was the recognition that many familiar kinds of reasoning are not deductively valid, but clearly confer justification on their conclusions. Here are some simple examples.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   342 citations  
  • Theory contraction through base contraction.André Fuhrmann - 1991 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 20 (2):175 - 203.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   93 citations  
  • Belief Change: Introduction and Overview.Eduardo Fermé & Sven Ove Hansson - 2018 - Springer Verlag.
    This book explains how the logic of theory change employs formal models in the investigation of changes in belief states and databases. The topics covered include equivalent characterizations of AGM operations, extended representations of the belief states, change operators not included in the original framework, iterated change, applications of the model, its connections with other formal frameworks, and criticism of the model.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • AGM-Like Paraconsistent Belief Change.Rafael R. Testa, Marcelo E. Coniglio & Márcio M. Ribeiro - 2017 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 25 (4):632-672.
    Two systems of belief change based on paraconsistent logics are introduced in this article by means of AGM-like postulates. The first one, AGMp, is defined over any paraconsistent logic which extends classical logic such that the law of excluded middle holds w.r.t. the paraconsistent negation. The second one, AGMo , is specifically designed for paraconsistent logics known as Logics of Formal Inconsistency (LFIs), which have a formal consistency operator that allows to recover all the classical inferences. Besides the three usual (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Shifting Priorities: Simple Representations for Twenty-seven Iterated Theory Change Operators.Hans Rott - 2009 - In Jacek Malinowski David Makinson & Wansing Heinrich (eds.), Towards Mathematical Philosophy. Springer. pp. 269–296.
    Prioritized bases, i.e., weakly ordered sets of sentences, have been used for specifying an agent’s ‘basic’ or ‘explicit’ beliefs, or alternatively for compactly encoding an agent’s belief state without the claim that the elements of a base are in any sense basic. This paper focuses on the second interpretation and shows how a shifting of priorities in prioritized bases can be used for a simple, constructive and intuitive way of representing a large variety of methods for the change of belief (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   43 citations  
  • Hierarchies of regulations and their logic.Carlos E. Alchourrón & David Makinson - 1981 - In Risto Hilpinen (ed.), New Studies in Deontic Logic: Norms, Actions, and the Foundations of Ethics. Dordrecht, Netherland: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 125--148.
    Investigates the resolution of contradictions and ambiguous derogations in a code, by means of the imposition of partial orderings.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  • Defeasible reasoning.Robert C. Koons - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • Handbook of Formal Argumentation.Pietro Baroni, Dov Gabbay, Massimilino Giacomin & Leendert van der Torre (eds.) - 2018 - London, England: College Publications.
    The Handbook of Formal Argumentation is a community effort aimed at providing a comprehensive and up-to-date view of the state of the art and current trends in the lively research field of formal argumentation. The first volume of the Handbook is organised into five parts, containing nineteen chapters in all, each written by leading experts in the field. The first part provides a general and historical perspective on the field. The second part gives a comprehensive coverage of the argumentation formalisms (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games.Phan Minh Dung - 1995 - Artificial Intelligence 77 (2):321-357.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   471 citations  
  • Change, Choice and Inference. A Study of Belief Revision and Nonmonotonic Reasoning.Hans Rott - 2001 - Studia Logica 77 (1):145-147.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   107 citations  
  • AGM 25 Years: Twenty-Five Years of Research in Belief Change.Eduardo Fermé & Sven Ove Hansson - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):295-331.
    The 1985 paper by Carlos Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors, and David Makinson, “On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions” was the starting-point of a large and rapidly growing literature that employs formal models in the investigation of changes in belief states and databases. In this review, the first twenty-five years of this development are summarized. The topics covered include equivalent characterizations of AGM operations, extended representations of the belief states, change operators not included in the original (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  • AGM Theory and Artificial Intelligence.Raúl Carnota & Ricardo Rodríguez - 2011 - In Erik J. Olson Sebastian Enqvist (ed.), Belief Revision meets Philosophy of Science. Springer. pp. 1--42.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities.Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor - 1997 - Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7 (1-2):25-75.
    ABSTRACT Inspired by legal reasoning, this paper presents a semantics and proof theory of a system for defeasible argumentation. Arguments are expressed in a logic-programming language with both weak and strong negation, conflicts between arguments are decided with the help of priorities on the rules. An important feature of the system is that these priorities are not fixed, but are themselves defeasibly derived as conclusions within the system. Thus debates on the choice between conflicting arguments can also be modelled. The (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   89 citations  
  • Paraconsistent Belief Revision.Graham Priest - 2001 - Theoria 67 (3):214-228.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments.Henry Prakken - 2010 - Argument and Computation 1 (2):93-124.
    An abstract framework for structured arguments is presented, which instantiates Dung's ('On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming, and n- Person Games', Artificial Intelligence , 77, 321-357) abstract argumentation frameworks. Arguments are defined as inference trees formed by applying two kinds of inference rules: strict and defeasible rules. This naturally leads to three ways of attacking an argument: attacking a premise, attacking a conclusion and attacking an inference. To resolve such attacks, preferences may (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   142 citations  
  • Logic of belief revision.Sven Ove Hansson - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • Recovery and epistemic residue.Sven Ove Hansson - 1999 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 8 (4):421-428.
    Two recent defences of the recovery postulate for contraction of belief sets are analyzed. It is concluded that recovery is defensible as a by-product of a formalization that is idealized in the sense of being simplified for the sake of clarity. However, recovery does not seem to be a required feature of the doxastic behaviour of ideal (perfectly rational) agents. It is reasonable to expect that there should be epistemic residues (remnants of rejected beliefs), but not that these should always (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Epistemic importance and minimal changes of belief.Peter Gärdenfors - 1984 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62 (2):136 – 157.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   49 citations  
  • Iterated belief revision, revised.Yi Jin & Michael Thielscher - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (1):1-18.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  • A truth maintenance system.Jon Doyle - 1979 - Artificial Intelligence 12 (3):231-272.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   138 citations  
  • Propositional knowledge base revision and minimal change.Hirofumi Katsuno & Alberto O. Mendelzon - 1991 - Artificial Intelligence 52 (3):263-294.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   124 citations  
  • A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation.Guillermo R. Simari & Ronald P. Loui - 1992 - Artificial Intelligence 53 (2-3):125-157.
    We present a mathematical approach to defeasible reasoning based on arguments. This approach integrates the notion of specificity introduced by Poole and the theory of warrant presented by Pollock. The main contribution of this paper is a precise, well-defined system which exhibits correct behavior when applied to the benchmark examples in the literature. It aims for usability rather than novelty. We prove that an order relation can be introduced among equivalence classes of arguments under the equi-specificity relation. We also prove (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   80 citations  
  • The Fixation of Belief and Its Undoing: Changing Beliefs through Inquiry by Isaac Levi. [REVIEW]Philip Kitcher - 1993 - Journal of Philosophy 90 (8):425-432.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • On the logic of theory change: Contraction functions and their associated revision functions.Carlos E. Alchourron & David Makinson - 1982 - Theoria 48 (1):14-37.
    A study in the logic of theory change, examining the properties of maxichoice contraction and revision operations.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   109 citations  
  • On the Difference between Updating a Knowledge Base and Revising it.H. Katsuno & A. O. Mendelzon - 1992 - In H. Katsuno & A. O. Mendelzon (eds.), Belief Revision. Cambridge University Press. pp. 183-203.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   91 citations  
  • Local change.Sven Hansson & Renata Wassermann - 2002 - Studia Logica 70 (1):49 - 76.
    An agent can usually hold a very large number of beliefs. However, only a small part of these beliefs is used at a time. Efficient operations for belief change should affect the beliefs of the agent locally, that is, the changes should be performed only in the relevant part of the belief state. In this paper we define a local consequence operator that only considers the relevant part of a belief base. This operator is used to define local versions of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • Selective revision.Eduardo L. Fermé & Sven Ove Hansson - 1999 - Studia Logica 63 (3):331-342.
    We introduce a constructive model of selective belief revision in which it is possible to accept only a part of the input information. A selective revision operator ο is defined by the equality K ο α = K * f(α), where * is an AGM revision operator and f a function, typically with the property ⊢ α → f(α). Axiomatic characterizations are provided for three variants of selective revision.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  • On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms.Martin Caminada & Leila Amgoud - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (5-6):286-310.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   82 citations  
  • Screened Revision.David Makinson - 1997 - Theoria 63 (1-2):14-23.
    Develops a concept of revision, akin in spirit to AGM partial meet revision, but in which the postulate of 'success' may fail. The basic idea is to see such an operation as composite, with a pre-processor using a priori considerations to resolve the question of whether to revise, following which another operation revises in a manner that protects the a priori material.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   47 citations  
  • Belief revisions and the Ramsey test for conditionals.Peter Gärdenfors - 1986 - Philosophical Review 95 (1):81-93.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   114 citations  
  • Revision by Comparison.Eduardo Fermé & Hans Rott - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence 157 (1):5-47.
    Since the early 1980s, logical theories of belief revision have offered formal methods for the transformation of knowledge bases or “corpora” of data and beliefs. Early models have dealt with unconditional acceptance and integration of potentially belief-contravening pieces of information into the existing corpus. More recently, models of “non-prioritized” revision were proposed that allow the agent rationally to refuse to accept the new information. This paper introduces a refined method for changing beliefs by specifying constraints on the relative plausibility of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • The Fixation of Belief and its Undoing: Changing Beliefs Through Inquiry.Isaac Levi - 1991 - New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
    Isaac Levi's new book is concerned with how one can justify changing one's beliefs. The discussion is deeply informed by the belief-doubt model advocated by C. S. Peirce and John Dewey, of which the book provides a substantial analysis. Professor Levi then addresses the conceptual framework of potential changes available to an inquirer. A structural approach to propositional attitudes is proposed, which rejects the conventional view that a propositional attitude involves a relation between an agent and either a linguistic entity (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   144 citations