Rationality postulates: applying argumentation theory for non-monotonic reasoning

Caminada, Martin ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7498-0238 2017. Rationality postulates: applying argumentation theory for non-monotonic reasoning. Gabbay, Dov, Torre, Leon van der, Baroni, Pietro and Giacomin, Massimiliano, eds. Handbook of Formal Argumentation, Volume 1, College Publications,

Preview

PDF - Accepted Post-Print Version Download (403kB) | Preview

Abstract

The current book chapter examines how to apply Dung’s theory of abstract argumentation to define meaningful forms of nonmonotonic inference. The idea is that arguments are constructed using strict and defeasible inference rules, and that it is then examined how these arguments attack (or defeat) each other. The thus defined argumentation framework provides the basis for applying Dung-style semantics, yielding a number of extensions of arguments. As each of the constructed arguments has a conclusion, an extension of arguments has an associated extension of conclusions. It are these extensions of conclusions that we are interested in. In particular, we ask ourselves whether each of these extensions is (1) consistent, (2) closed under the strict inference rules and (3) free from undesired interference. We examine the current generation of techniques to satisfy these properties, and identify some research issues that are yet to be dealt with.

Item Type:	Book Section
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Computer Science & Informatics
Subjects:	Q Science > QA Mathematics > QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
Publisher:	College Publications
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	19 April 2017
Date of Acceptance:	7 April 2017
Last Modified:	21 Oct 2022 07:29
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/99971

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item