Abstract dialectical frameworks

Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 102-111

  Brewka, Gerhard ^a   Woltran, Stefan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^b VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SEMANTICS;

ACCEPTANCE CONDITIONS; ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS; LEGAL PROOF; PREFERRED SEMANTICS;

KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION;

EID: 78049241424     PISSN: 23341025     EISSN: 23341033     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Amgoud, L., and Besnard, P. 2009. Bridging the gap between abstract argumentation systems and logic. In Proc. SUM'09, 12-27.
2. Amgoud, L., and Cayrol, C. 1998. On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation. In Proc. UAI'98, 1-7.
3. Atkinson, K., and Bench-Capon, T. J. M. 2007. Argumentation and standards of proof. In Proc. ICAIL'07, 107-116.
4. Caminada, M. 2006. Semi-stable semantics. In Proc. COMMA'06, 121-130.
5. Cayrol, C., and Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C. 2009. Bipolar abstract argumentation systems. In Rahwan, I., and Simari, G., eds., Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer. 65-84.
6. Denecker, M.; Marek, V. W.; and Truszczynski, M. 2004. Ultimate approximation and its application in nonmonotonic knowledge representation systems. Inf. Comput. 192(1):84- 121.
7. Dimopoulos, Y., and Torres, A. 1996. Graph theoretical structures in logic programs and default theories. Theor. Comput. Sci. 170(1-2):209-244.
8. Dimopoulos, Y.; Moraitis, P.; and Amgoud, L. 2009. Extending argumentation to make good decisions. In Proc. ADT'09, 225-236.
9. Dung, P. M.; Mancarella, P.; and Toni, F. 2007. Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15):642- 674.
10. Dung, P. M. 1995. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2):321-358.
11. Dunne, P. E., and Bench-Capon, T. J. M. 2002. Coherence in finite argument systems. Artif. Intell. 141(1/2):187-203.
12. Dunne, P. E.; Hunter, A.; McBurney, P.; Parsons, S.; and Wooldridge, M. 2009. Inconsistency tolerance in weighted argument systems. In Proc. AAMAS'09, 851-858.
13. Faber, W.; Leone, N.; and Pfeifer, G. 2004. Recursive aggregates in disjunctive logic programs: Semantics and complexity. In Proc. JELIA'04, 200-212.
14. Farley, A. M., and Freeman, K. 1995. Burden of proof in legal argumentation. In Proc. ICAIL'95, 156-164.
15. Gelder, A. V.; Ross, K. A.; and Schlipf, J. S. 1991. The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. J. ACM 38(3):620-650.
16. Gelfond, M., and Lifschitz, V. 1988. The Stable Model Semantics for Logic Programming. In Proc. ICLP'88, 1070- 1080.
17. Gordon, T. F., andWalton, D. 2009. Proof burdens and standards. In Rahwan, I., and Simari, G., eds., Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. 239-258.
18. Gordon, T. F.; Prakken, H.; and Walton, D. 2007. The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15):875-896.
19. Modgil, S., and Caminada, M. 2009. Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks. In Rahwan, I., and Simari, G., eds., Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer. 105-129.
20. Oren, N., and Norman, T. J. 2008. Semantics for evidencebased argumentation. In Proc. COMMA'08, 276-284.
21. Prakken, H. 2009. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Technical Report UU-CS-2009- 019, Utrecht University.
22. Wooldridge, M.; Dunne, P. E.; and Parsons, S. 2006. On the complexity of linking deductive and abstract argument systems. In Proc. AAAI'06, 299-304.
23. Wyner, A.; Bench-Capon, T.; and Dunne, P. E. 2009. Instantiating knowledge bases in abstract argumentation frameworks. In Proc. AAAI Fall Symposium - The Uses of Computational Argumentation.