Corrigendum to “A general account of argumentation with preferences” (Artificial Intelligence (2013) 195 (361–397), (S0004370212001361) (10.1016/j.artint.2012.10.008));A general account of argumentation with preferences

Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 195, Issue , 2013, Pages 361-397

  Modgil, Sanjay ^a   Prakken, Henry ^b,c  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Dung; Non monotonic reasoning; Preferences; Structured argumentation; Rationality postulates

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION; CLASSICAL LOGIC; CONFLICT FREE; DUNG; INFERENCE RULES; NON-MONOTONIC REASONING; PREFERENCES; RATIONALITY POSTULATES;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 84879958953     PISSN: 00043702     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.artint.2018.05.001     Document Type: Erratum

References (50)

1. L. Amgoud, Five weaknesses of ASPIC+, in: Proc. 14th International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge Based-Systems (IPMU'12), 2012, pp. 122-131.
2. L. Amgoud, P. Besnard, Bridging the gap between abstract argumentation systems and logic, in: Proc. 3rd International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty (SUM'09), 2009, pp. 12-27.
3. L. Amgoud, P. Besnard, A formal analysis of logic-based argumentation systems, in: Proc. 4th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty (SUM'10), 2010, pp. 42-55.
4. L. Amgoud, C. Cayrol, Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks, International Journal of Automated Reasoning 29 (2) (2002) 125-169.
5. L. Amgoud, C. Cayrol, A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 34 (1-3) (2002) 197-215. (Pubitemid 37133007)
6. L. Amgoud, G. Vesic, Generalizing stable semantics by preferences, in: P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, G.R. Simari (Eds.), Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 39-50.
7. L. Amgoud, S. Vesic, Repairing preference-based argumentation frameworks, in: Proc. 21st International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, 2009, pp. 665-670.
8. L. Amgoud, S. Vesic, Handling inconsistency with preference-based argumentation, in: Proc. 4th International Conference on Scalable Uncertainty Management (SUM'10), 2010, pp. 56-69.
9. L. Amgoud, S. Vesic, A new approach for preference-based argumentation frameworks, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 63 (2) (2011) 149-183.
10. T.J.M. Bench-Capon, Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks, Journal of Logic and Computation 13 (3) (2003) 429-448.
11. T.J.M. Bench-Capon, P.E. Dunne, Argumentation in artificial intelligence, Artificial Intelligence 171 (2007) 10-15.
12. P. Besnard, A. Hunter, A logic-based theory of deductive arguments, Artificial Intelligence 128 (2001) 203-235. (Pubitemid 32421514)
13. P. Besnard, A. Hunter, Elements of Argumentation, MIT Press, 2008.
14. F.J. Bex, S. Modgil, H. Prakken, C. Reed, On logical specifications of the argument interchange format, Journal of Logic and Computation, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exs033, 2012.
15. A. Bondarenko, P.M. Dung, R.A. Kowalski, F. Toni, An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence 93 (1997) 63-101. (Pubitemid 127401113)
16. G. Brewka, Preferred subtheories: An extended logical framework for default reasoning, in: Proc. 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial intelligence, 1989, pp. 1043-1048.
17. G. Brewka, Nonmonotonic Reasoning: Logical Foundations of Commonsense, Cambridge University Press, 1991.
18. M. Caminada, L. Amgoud, On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms, Artificial Intelligence 171 (5-6) (2007) 286-310. (Pubitemid 46560479)
19. M. Caminada, W. Carnielli, P.E. Dunne, Semi-stable semantics, Journal of Logic and Computation 22 (5) (2012) 1207-1254.
20. C. Cayrol, On the relation between argumentation and non-monotonic coherence-based entailment, in: Proc. 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial intelligence, 1995, pp. 1443-1448.
21. C. Cayrol, V. Royer, C. Saurel, Management of preferences in assumption-based reasoning, in: Proc. 4th International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge Based-Systems (IPMU'92), 1992, pp. 13-22.
22. C. Chesnevar, J. McGinnis, S. Modgil, Rahwan, C. Reed, G. Simari, M. South, G. Vreeswijk, S. Willmott, Towards an argument interchange format, The Knowledge Engineering Review 21 (4) (2006) 293-316.
23. P.M. Dung, On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games, Artificial Intelligence 77 (2) (1995) 321-358.
24. M.L. Ginsberg, AI and nonmonotonic reasoning, in: D. Gabbay, C.J. Hogger, J.A. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994, pp. 1-33.
25. T.F. Gordon, H. Prakken, D.N. Walton, The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof, Artificial Intelligence 171 (2007) 875-896. (Pubitemid 47285070)
26. N. Gorogiannis, A. Hunter, Instantiating abstract argumentation with classical logic arguments: Postulates and properties, Artificial Intelligence 175 (2011) 1479-1497.
27. G. Governatori, M.J. Maher, An argumentation-theoretic characterization of defeasible logic, in: Proc. 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2000, pp. 469-473.
28. S. Kaci, Refined preference-based argumentation frameworks, in: P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, G.R. Simari (Eds.), Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 299-310.
29. R.A. Kowalski, F. Toni, Abstract argumentation, Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3) (1996) 275-296. (Pubitemid 126706890)
30. F. Lin, Y. Shoham, Argument systems: A uniform basis for nonmonotonic reasoning, in: Proc. 1st International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR-89), 1989, pp. 245-255.
31. R.P. Loui, Defeat among arguments: A system of defeasible inference, Computational Intelligence 2 (1987) 100-106.
32. H. Mercier, D. Sperber, Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2) (2011) 57-747.
33. S. Modgil, Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks, Artificial Intelligence 173 (9-10) (2009) 901-934.
34. S. Modgil, M. Caminada, Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks, in: I. Rahwan, G. Simari (Eds.), Argumentation in AI, Springer-Verlag, 2009, pp. 105-129.
35. S. Modgil, H. Prakken, Reasoning about preferences in structured extended argumentation frameworks, in: P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, G.R. Simari (Eds.), Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 347-358.
36. S. Modgil, H. Prakken, Revisiting preferences and argumentation, in: International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2011), 2011, pp. 1021-1026.
37. J.L. Pollock, Defeasible reasoning, Cognitive Science 11 (1987) 481-518.
38. J.L. Pollock, Justification and defeat, Artificial Intelligence 67 (1994) 377-408.
39. J.L. Pollock, Cognitive Carpentry. A Blueprint for How to Build a Person, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
40. H. Prakken, An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments, Argument and Computation 1 (2) (2010) 93-124.
41. H. Prakken, Reconstructing Popov v. Hayashi in a framework for argumentation with structured arguments and dungean semantics, Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (1) (2012) 57-82.
42. H. Prakken, Some reflections on two current trends in formal argumentation, in: Logic Programs, Norms and Action. Essays in Honour of Marek J. Sergot on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2012, pp. 249-272.
43. H. Prakken, S. Modgil, Clarifying some misconceptions on the ASPIC+ framework, in: B. Verheij, S. Woltran, S. Szeider (Eds.), Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2012, pp. 442-453.
44. H. Prakken, G. Sartor, Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities, Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7 (1997) 25-75.
45. I. Rahwan, G. Simari (Eds.), Argumentation in AI, Springer-Verlag, 2009.
46. G.R. Simari, R.P. Loui, A mathematical treatment of defeasible argumentation and its implementation, Artificial Intelligence 53 (1992) 125-157.
47. B. van Gijzel, H. Prakken, Relating Carneades with abstract argumentation via the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumentation, Argument and Computation 1 (2012) 21-47.
48. G.A.W. Vreeswijk, Abstract argumentation systems, Artificial Intelligence 90 (1997) 225-279. (Pubitemid 127398371)
49. D.N. Walton, Argument Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1996.
50. Y. Wu, Between argument and conclusion. Argument-based approaches to discussion, inference and uncertainty, Chapter 6 in Doctoral Dissertation, University of Luxemburg, 2012.