A general account of argumentation with preferences
From MaRDI portal
Publication:360132
DOI10.1016/J.ARTINT.2012.10.008zbMATH Open1270.68284arXiv1804.06763OpenAlexW2071122890MaRDI QIDQ360132FDOQ360132
Authors: Sanjay Modgil, Henry Prakken 
Publication date: 26 August 2013
Published in: Artificial Intelligence (Search for Journal in Brave)
Abstract: This paper builds on the recent ASPIC+ formalism, to develop a general framework for argumentation with preferences. We motivate a revised definition of conflict free sets of arguments, adapt ASPIC+ to accommodate a broader range of instantiating logics, and show that under some assumptions, the resulting framework satisfies key properties and rationality postulates. We then show that the generalised framework accommodates Tarskian logic instantiations extended with preferences, and then study instantiations of the framework by classical logic approaches to argumentation. We conclude by arguing that ASPIC+'s modelling of defeasible inference rules further testifies to the generality of the framework, and then examine and counter recent critiques of Dung's framework and its extensions to accommodate preferences.
Full work available at URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.06763
Recommendations
- Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks
- An Abstract Theory of Argumentation That Accommodates Defeasible Reasoning About Preferences
- Two roles of preferences in argumentation frameworks
- Preference in Abstract Argumentation
- On the interaction between logic and preference in structured argumentation
- Revealed preference in argumentation: algorithms and applications
- Corrigendum to: ``A general account of argumentation with preferences
- A new approach for preference-based argumentation frameworks
Cited In (63)
- Reduction-based approaches to implement Modgil's extended argumentation frameworks
- Some reflections on two current trends in formal argumentation
- Defeasible normative reasoning
- Argument graphs and assumption-based argumentation
- A general semi-structured formalism for computational argumentation: definition, properties, and examples of application
- A multi attack argumentation framework
- Corrigendum to: ``A general account of argumentation with preferences
- Two roles of preferences in argumentation frameworks
- Normality, non-contamination and logical depth in classical natural deduction
- On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics
- A Formalization of the Slippery Slope Argument
- Computational complexity of flat and generic assumption-based argumentation, with and without probabilities
- On the graded acceptability of arguments in abstract and instantiated argumentation
- Revealed preference in argumentation: algorithms and applications
- Simple contrapositive assumption-based argumentation. II: Reasoning with preferences
- Constrained Value-Based Argumentation Framework
- Probabilistic abstract argumentation frameworks, a possible world view
- A characterization of types of support between structured arguments and their relationship with support in abstract argumentation
- Simple contrapositive assumption-based argumentation frameworks
- Belief revision in structured probabilistic argumentation, model and application to cyber security
- Evaluation of arguments in weighted bipolar graphs
- Logical argumentation by dynamic proof systems
- Arguing about constitutive and regulative norms
- A review of the relations between logical argumentation and reasoning with maximal consistency
- An Abstract Theory of Argumentation That Accommodates Defeasible Reasoning About Preferences
- Correct grounded reasoning with presumptive arguments
- A paraconsistent approach to deal with epistemic inconsistencies in argumentation
- Rich preference-based argumentation frameworks
- Explaining Bayesian networks using argumentation
- Law and logic: a review from an argumentation perspective
- An axiomatic analysis of structured argumentation with priorities
- Semantic-based construction of arguments: an answer set programming approach
- Value-based argumentation framework built from prioritized qualitative choice logic
- Enabling reasoning with LegalRuleML
- An argumentation system for defeasible reasoning
- Inference procedures and engine for probabilistic argumentation
- Logic-based argumentation with existential rules
- Evaluation of argument strength in attack graphs: foundations and semantics
- Labellings for assumption-based and abstract argumentation
- A two-phase method for extracting explanatory arguments from Bayesian networks
- Preference in Abstract Argumentation
- A Comparative Study of Some Central Notions of ASPIC+ and DeLP
- Hierarchical Argumentation
- EMIL: extracting meaning from inconsistent language. Towards argumentation using a controlled natural language interface
- Fundamental properties of attack relations in structured argumentation with priorities
- Base argumentation as an abstraction of deductive argumentation
- Towards a sound and complete dialogue system for handling enthymemes
- Argumentation for practical reasoning: an axiomatic approach
- Classical logic, argument and dialectic
- Connecting fuzzy logic and argumentation frames via logical attack principles
- Assessing the epistemological relevance of Dung-style argumentation theories
- A postulate-driven study of logical argumentation
- Weakest link in formal argumentation: lookahead and principle-based analysis
- CONCILIATORY REASONING, SELF-DEFEAT, AND ABSTRACT ARGUMENTATION
- A structured bipolar argumentation theory for providing explanations in practical reasoning
- When is argumentation deductive?
- Constrained derivation in assumption-based argumentation
- An awareness epistemic framework for belief, argumentation and their dynamics
- The Jiminy advisor: moral agreements among stakeholders based on norms and argumentation
- Integrated preference argumentation and applications in consumer behaviour analyses
- An Abstract Look at Awareness Models and Their Dynamics
- Reasoning in assumption-based argumentation using tree-decompositions
- Minimality, necessity and sufficiency for argumentation and explanation
This page was built for publication: A general account of argumentation with preferences
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q360132)
