Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. (1 other version)The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof.Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken & Douglas Walton - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (10-15):875-896.
    We present a formal, mathematical model of argument structure and evaluation, taking seriously the procedural and dialogical aspects of argumentation. The model applies proof standards to determine the acceptability of statements on an issue-by-issue basis. The model uses different types of premises (ordinary premises, assumptions and exceptions) and information about the dialectical status of statements (stated, questioned, accepted or rejected) to allow the burden of proof to be allocated to the proponent or the respondent, as appropriate, for each premise separately. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   105 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  
  • (1 other version)The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   708 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  
  • Finding contradictions in text.Christopher Manning - manuscript
    Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Anna N. Rafferty and Christopher D. Manning Linguistics Department Computer Science Department Stanford University Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 Stanford, CA 94305 {rafferty,manning}@stanford.edu [email protected]..
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 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  
  • Generating and evaluating evaluative arguments.Giuseppe Carenini & Johanna D. Moore - 2006 - Artificial Intelligence 170 (11):925-952.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Behavioral Experiments for Assessing the Abstract Argumentation Semantics of Reinstatement.Iyad Rahwan, Mohammed I. Madakkatel, Jean-François Bonnefon, Ruqiyabi N. Awan & Sherief Abdallah - 2010 - Cognitive Science 34 (8):1483-1502.
    Argumentation is a very fertile area of research in Artificial Intelligence, and various semantics have been developed to predict when an argument can be accepted, depending on the abstract structure of its defeaters and defenders. When these semantics make conflicting predictions, theoretical arbitration typically relies on ad hoc examples and normative intuition about what prediction ought to be the correct one. We advocate a complementary, descriptive-experimental method, based on the collection of behavioral data about the way human reasoners handle these (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Logic and Lexicon: The Semantics of the Indefinite.Manfred Pinkal - 1995 - Springer Verlag.
    Semantic underspecification is an essential and pervasive property of natural language. This monograph provides a comprehensive survey of the various phenomena in the field of ambiguity and vagueness. The book discusses the major theories of semantic indefiniteness, which have been proposed in linguistics, philosophy and computer science. It argues for a view of indefiniteness as the potential for further contextual specification, and proposes a unified logical treatment of indefiniteness on this basis. The inherent inconsistency of natural language induced by irreducible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations