Towards argument representational tools for hybrid argumentation systems

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 6772 LNCS, Issue PART 2, 2011, Pages 236-245

  González, María Paula ^a,b   Gottifredi, Sebastian ^a,b   García, Alejandro J ^a,b   Simari, Guillermo R ^b  

^a National Council of Scientific and Technical Reseach CONICET ^*  (Argentina)

^b UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DEL SUR   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Defeasible Argumentation; Hybrid Argumentation Systems; Knowledge Representation; Usability Guideline

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION SYSTEMS; DEFEASIBLE ARGUMENTATION; DESIGN GUIDELINES; DIRECT MANIPULATION; END-USERS; GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATIONS; REASONING SYSTEM; USABILITY GUIDELINE;

KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION; SEMANTICS; USABILITY ENGINEERING;

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT;

EID: 79960313990     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-21669-5_28     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Chesñevar, C.I., Maguitman, A., Loui, R.: Logical Models of Argument. ACM Computing Surveys 32(4), 337-383 (2000)
2. Verheij, B.: Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence 150(1-2), 291-324 (2003)
3. Verheij, B.: Argumentation Support Software: Boxes-and-Arrows and Beyond. Law, Probability & Risk 6, 187-208 (2007)
4. González, M.P., Chesñevar, C., Pinkwart, N., Gomez Lucero, M.: Developing Argument Assistant System from a Usability viewpoint. In: Proc. KMIS 2010, pp. 157-163 (2010)
5. García, A., Simari, G.: Defeasible Logic Programming: An Argumentative Approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1), 95-138 (2004)
6. Brena, R., Chesñevar, C.: Information Distribution Decisions Supported by Argumentation. In: Encyclopaedia of Decision Making and Decision Support Technology, Information Science Reference, vol. II, pp. 489-495 (2008), ISBN 978-1-59904-843-7
7. Williams, M., Hunter, H.: Harnessing ontologies for argument-based decision-making in breast cancer. In: Proceedings of ICTAI 2007, pp. 254-261 (2007)
8. González, M.P., Penichet, V.M.R., Simari, G.R., Tesoriero, R.: Development of CSCW interfaces from a user-centered viewpoint: Extending the TOUCHE process model through defeasible argumentation. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5619, pp. 955-964. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
9. Bench-Capon, T., Dunne, E.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Int. Journal on Artificial Intelligence 171, 619-641 (2007)
10. Reed, C., Rowe, G.: Araucaria: Software for Argument Analysis, Diagramming and Representation. Int. Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 14, 961-980 (2004)
11. Buckingham Shum, S.: Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 Argumentation. In: Proc. Int. Conf. COMMA 2008, pp. 97-108. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)
12. Okada, A., Buckingham Shum, S., Sherborne, T. (eds.): Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques. Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2008), ISBN 978-1-84800-148-0
13. Van den Braak, S., Vreeswijk, G., Prakken, H.: AVERs: an argument visualization tool for representing stories about evidence. In: Proc. of the 11th ICAIL, pp. 11-15 (2007)
14. Hunter, T.: Hybrid argumentation systems for structured news reports. The Knowledge Engineering Review 16(4), 295-329 (2001), ISSN 0269-8889
15. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. In: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 128, pp. 203-235 (2001)
16. Rahwan, I., Amgoud, L.: An Argumentation-based Approach for Practical Reasoning. In: 5th AAMAS 2006, pp. 347-354. ACM Press, New York (2006)
17. Gaertner, D., Toni, F.: Hybrid argumentation and its properties. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. COMMA, pp. 183-195. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008), ISBN: 978-1-58603-859-5
18. Kakas, A.C., Toni, F.: Computing Argumentation in Logic Programming. Journal of Logic and Computation 9, 515-562 (1999)
19. Morge, M.: The hedgehog and the fox. In: Rahwan, I., Parsons, S., Reed, C. (eds.) Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4946, pp. 114-131. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
20. Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1, 93-124 (2010)
21. South, M., Vreeswijk, G., Fox, J.: A Java Dung Reasoner. In: Proc. Int. Conf. COMMA 2008, pp. 360-368. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008), ISBN: 978-1-58603-859-5
22. Brewka, G., Gordin, T.: Carneades and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks: A Reconstruction. In: Proc. COMMA 2010, pp. 3-12. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010), ISBN 978-1-60750-618-8
23. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Semantics of Abstract Argument Systems. In: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 25-44. Springer, Heidelberg (2009), ISBN: 978-0-387-98196-3
24. Gaertner, D., Toni, F.: Computing Arguments and Attacks in Assumption-Based Argumentation, vol. 22 (6), pp. 24-33. IS, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007), ISSN 1541-1672
25. Escarza, S., Castro, S., Martig, S.: DeLP Viewer: a Defeasible Programming Visualization Tool. In: PROC. XVCACIC, pp. 556-565 (2009), ISBN: 978-897-24068-4-1
26. Williams, M., Hunter, H.: Harnessing ontologies for argument-based decision-making in breast cancer. In: Proceedings of ICTAI 2007, pp. 254-261 (2007)