Minimality, necessity and sufficiency for argumentation and explanation

DOI10.1016/J.IJAR.2024.109143MaRDI QIDQ6548459FDOQ6548459

Authors: Annemarie Borg, Floris Bex 

Publication date: 1 June 2024

Published in: International Journal of Approximate Reasoning (Search for Journal in Brave)

Recommendations

• Necessary and sufficient explanations for argumentation-based conclusions
• Explanation semantics for abstract argumentation
• On explanations for non-acceptable arguments
• On searching explanatory argumentation graphs
• Explaining non-acceptability in abstract argumentation

zbMATH Keywords

formal argumentationAI and lawexplainable artificial intelligencestructured argumentation frameworks

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Reasoning under uncertainty in the context of artificial intelligence (68T37)

Cites Work

• Argumentation in artificial intelligence
• An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning
• On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and \(n\)-person games
• A general account of argumentation with preferences
• Defeasible logic programming: an argumentative approach
• Dynamics in Argumentation with Single Extensions: Abstraction Principles and the Grounded Extension
• On strongest necessary and weakest sufficient conditions
• Minimal strong admissibility: a complexity analysis
• Logics in Artificial Intelligence
• Explanation semantics for abstract argumentation
• Explanation in artificial intelligence: insights from the social sciences
• Computational models of argument. Proceedings of the 4th conference, COMMA 2012, Vienna, Austria, September 10--12, 2012
• On explanations for non-acceptable arguments
• From fine-grained properties to broad principles for gradual argumentation: a principled spectrum
• Explaining non-acceptability in abstract argumentation
• Explanation in AI and law: past, present and future
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Abstraction in argumentation: necessary but dangerous
• Necessary and sufficient explanations for argumentation-based conclusions
• Argumentative explanations for interactive recommendations
• Interpretability of gradual semantics in abstract argumentation
• Change in quantitative bipolar argumentation: sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations

Cited In (1)

• Change in quantitative bipolar argumentation: sufficient, necessary, and counterfactual explanations

This page was built for publication: Minimality, necessity and sufficiency for argumentation and explanation

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6548459)