Senses of "argument" in instantiated argumentation frameworks

Wyner, Adam, Bench-Capon, Trevor, Dunne, Paul and Cerutti, Federico ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0755-0358 2015. Senses of "argument" in instantiated argumentation frameworks. Argument and Computation 6 (1) , pp. 50-72. 10.1080/19462166.2014.1002535

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) provide a fruitful basis for exploring issues of defeasible reasoning. Their power largely derives from the abstract nature of the arguments within the framework, where arguments are atomic nodes in an undifferentiated relation of attack. This abstraction conceals different senses of argument, namely a single step reason to a claim, a series of reasoning steps to a single claim, reasoning steps for and against a claim. Concrete instantiations encounter difficulties and complexities as a result of conflating these senses. To distinguish them, we provide an approach to instantiating AFs in which the nodes are restricted to literals and rules, encoding the underlying theory directly. Arguments in these senses emerge from this framework as distinctive structures of nodes and paths. As a consequence of the approach, we reduce the effort of computing argumentation extensions, which is in contrast to other approaches. Our framework retains the theoretical and computational benefits of an abstract AF, distinguishes senses of argument, and efficiently computes extensions. Given the mixed intended audience of the paper, the style of presentation is semi-formal.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Computer Science & Informatics
Subjects:	Q Science > QA Mathematics > QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
Publisher:	Taylor & Francis
ISSN:	1946-2166
Last Modified:	31 Oct 2022 10:30
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/85186

Citation Data

Cited 12 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item