DefLog: on the Logical Interpretation of Prima Facie Justified Assumptions
From MaRDI portal
Publication:4444964
Recommendations
Cited in
(17)- A two-phase method for extracting explanatory arguments from Bayesian networks
- A Generalization of Dung’s Abstract Framework for Argumentation: Arguing with Sets of Attacking Arguments
- Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: towards a better understanding
- An approach to abstract argumentation with recursive attack and support
- An argumentation-based approach for identifying and dealing with incompatibilities among procedural goals
- A characterization of types of support between structured arguments and their relationship with support in abstract argumentation
- Foundations for a logic of arguments
- EMIL: extracting meaning from inconsistent language. Towards argumentation using a controlled natural language interface
- Law and logic: a review from an argumentation perspective
- Backing and undercutting in defeasible logic programming
- Structured argumentation dynamics. Undermining attacks in default justification logic
- Coalitions of arguments: a tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks
- A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation
- Annotated defeasible logic
- The carneades model of argument and burden of proof
- Infinite argumentation frameworks. On the existence and uniqueness of extensions
- Handling support cycles and collective interactions in the logical encoding of higher-order bipolar argumentation frameworks
This page was built for publication: DefLog: on the Logical Interpretation of Prima Facie Justified Assumptions
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4444964)