A general account of argumentation with preferences
From MaRDI portal
(Redirected from Publication:360132)
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.
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
(82)- Logic-based argumentation with existential rules
- Inference procedures and engine for probabilistic argumentation
- Fundamental properties of attack relations in structured argumentation with priorities
- Classical logic, argument and dialectic
- Corrigendum to: ``A general account of argumentation with preferences
- A characterization of types of support between structured arguments and their relationship with support in abstract argumentation
- A general semi-structured formalism for computational argumentation: definition, properties, and examples of application
- On the interaction between logic and preference in structured argumentation
- Towards a general framework for dialogues that accommodate reasoning about preferences
- Defeasible normative reasoning
- Evaluation of argument strength in attack graphs: foundations and semantics
- Simple contrapositive assumption-based argumentation. II: Reasoning with preferences
- A paraconsistent approach to deal with epistemic inconsistencies in argumentation
- Simple contrapositive assumption-based argumentation frameworks
- Revealed preference in argumentation: algorithms and applications
- Computational complexity of flat and generic assumption-based argumentation, with and without probabilities
- A review of the relations between logical argumentation and reasoning with maximal consistency
- EMIL: extracting meaning from inconsistent language. Towards argumentation using a controlled natural language interface
- Probabilistic abstract argumentation frameworks, a possible world view
- Normality, non-contamination and logical depth in classical natural deduction
- Connecting fuzzy logic and argumentation frames via logical attack principles
- On the graded acceptability of arguments in abstract and instantiated argumentation
- On the equivalence between logic programming semantics and argumentation semantics
- Rich preference-based argumentation frameworks
- A two-phase method for extracting explanatory arguments from Bayesian networks
- Labellings for assumption-based and abstract argumentation
- An argumentation system for defeasible reasoning
- Logical argumentation by dynamic proof systems
- Argument graphs and assumption-based argumentation
- A multi attack argumentation framework
- Towards a sound and complete dialogue system for handling enthymemes
- Base argumentation as an abstraction of deductive argumentation
- Correct grounded reasoning with presumptive arguments
- Some reflections on two current trends in formal argumentation
- Two roles of preferences in argumentation frameworks
- Explaining Bayesian networks using argumentation
- An Abstract Theory of Argumentation That Accommodates Defeasible Reasoning About Preferences
- Hierarchical Argumentation
- Argumentation for practical reasoning: an axiomatic approach
- Arguing about constitutive and regulative norms
- A comparative study of some central notions of \(\mathit{ASPIC}^+\) and \textit{DeLP}
- A Formalization of the Slippery Slope Argument
- Constrained Value-Based Argumentation Framework
- A justification logic for argument evaluation
- Reduction-based approaches to implement Modgil's extended argumentation frameworks
- Enabling reasoning with LegalRuleML
- Preference in Abstract Argumentation
- Belief revision in structured probabilistic argumentation, model and application to cyber security
- Assessing the epistemological relevance of Dung-style argumentation theories
- Evaluation of arguments in weighted bipolar graphs
- CONCILIATORY REASONING, SELF-DEFEAT, AND ABSTRACT ARGUMENTATION
- When is argumentation deductive?
- Integrated preference argumentation and applications in consumer behaviour analyses
- An Abstract Look at Awareness Models and Their Dynamics
- A postulate-driven study of logical argumentation
- Weakest link in formal argumentation: lookahead and principle-based analysis
- A structured bipolar argumentation theory for providing explanations in practical reasoning
- The Jiminy advisor: moral agreements among stakeholders based on norms and argumentation
- Reasoning in assumption-based argumentation using tree-decompositions
- Minimality, necessity and sufficiency for argumentation and explanation
- Constrained derivation in assumption-based argumentation
- An awareness epistemic framework for belief, argumentation and their dynamics
- Bridging informal reasoning and formal proving: the role of argumentation in proof-events
- Preference-based extension enforcement in argumentation
- Constraints and lifting-based (conditional) preferences in abstract argumentation
- Principles of logics for plausible reasoning
- Weakest link, prioritized default logic and principles in argumentation
- Argumentative reasoning in ASPIC^+ under incomplete information
- Knowledge representation, scientific argumentation and non-monotonic logic
- A dialectical formalisation of preferred subtheories reasoning under resource bounds
- Integrating user preferences into gradual bipolar argumentation for personalised decision support
- Simple contrapositive assumption-based argumentation frameworks with preferences: partial orders and collective attacks
- Abstract argumentation frameworks with strong and weak constraints
- On generalized notions of consistency and reinstatement and their preservation in formal argumentation
- An abstract and structured account of dialectical argument strength
- Title not available (Why is no real title available?)
- Title not available (Why is no real title available?)
- Title not available (Why is no real title available?)
- Law and logic: a review from an argumentation perspective
- Semantic-based construction of arguments: an answer set programming approach
- Value-based argumentation framework built from prioritized qualitative choice logic
- An axiomatic analysis of structured argumentation with priorities
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)
