Norms and argumentation

Agreement Technologies

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 233-249

  Oren, Nir ^a   Rotolo, Antonino ^b   van der Torre, Leendert ^c   Villata, Serena ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^d INRIA   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGREEMENT TECHNOLOGIES;

KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION;

EID: 84911421316     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_16     Document Type: Chapter

References (66)

1. Alchourrôn, C.E., and D.C. Makinson. 1982. The logic of theory change: Contraction functions and their associated revision functions. Theoria 48: 14-37.
2. Alchourrôn, C., P. Gârdenfors, and D. Makinson. 1985. On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50(2): 510-530.
3. Aqvist, L. 1967. Good samaritans, contrary-to-duty imperatives, and epistemic obligations. Nôus 1:361-379.
4. Artikis, A., M. Sergot, and J. Pitt. 2009. Specifying norm-governed computational societies. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 10(1): 1-42.
5. Ashley, K.D. 1990. Modeling legal argument - reasoning with cases and hypotheticals, Artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. Cambridge: MIT.
6. Aucher, G., G. Boella, and L. van der Torre. 2010. Prescriptive and descriptive obligations in dynamic epistemic deontic logic. In AI approaches to the complexity of legal systems (AICOL 2009), LNAI, vol. 6237, 150-161. Berlin: Springer.
7. Barwise, J., and L.S. Moss. 1996. Vicious circles: On the mathematics of non-wellfounded phenomena. Stanford: CSLI.
8. Bench-Capon, T., H. Prakken, and G. Sartor. 2010. Argumentation in legal reasoning, argumentation in artificial intelligence. Berlin: Springer.
9. Bex, F., H. Prakken, C. Reed, and D. Walton. 2003. Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalisations. Artificial Intelligence Law 11(2-3): 125-165.
10. Billhardt, H., R. Centeno, C.E. Cuesta, A. Fernández, R. Hermoso, R. Ortiz, S. Ossowski, J.S. Pérez-Sotelo, and M. Vasirani. 2011. Organisational structures in next-generation distributed systems: Towards a technology of agreement. Multiagent and Grid Systems 7(2-3): 109-125.
11. Bochman, A. 2003. Collective argumentation and disjunctive logic programming. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3): 405-428.
12. Bochman, A. 2005. Propositional argumentation and causal reasoning. In Proceedings of the nineteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI 2005), Edinburgh, 388-393.
13. Boella, G., and L. van der Torre. 2003. BDI and BOID argumentation. In Proceedings of the third workshop on computational models of natural argument (CMNA 2003), Acapulco.
14. Boella, G., and L. van der Torre. 2004. The social delegation cycle. In Proceedings of the 7th international workshop on deontic logic in computer science (DEON 2004), Madeira, 29-42.
15. Boella, G., and L. Van der Torre. 2004. Regulative and constitutive norms in normative multiagent systems. In Proceedings of the ninth international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR 2004), Whistler, 255-266.
16. Boella, G., R. Damiano, J. Hulstijn, and L. van der Torre. 2006. ACL Semantics Between Social Commitments and Mental Attitudes. In Agent communication II, international workshops on agent communication (AC 2005), Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 3859, 30-44. Berlin: Springer.
17. Boella, G., G. Pigozzi, and L. van der Torre. 2009. Normative framework for normative system change. In Proceedings ofthe eighth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2009), 169-176. New York: ACM.
18. Brandom, R. 1998. Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
19. Broersen, J., M. Dastani, J. Hulstijn, Z. Huang, and L. van der Torre. 2001. The BOID architecture: Conflicts between beliefs, obligations, intentions and desires. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on autonomous agents (AAMAS 2001), Ann Arbor, 9-16.
20. Castañeda, H.N. 1988. Knowledge and epistemic obligation. Philosophical Perspectives 2: 211-233.
21. Cuppens, F. 1993. A logical formalization of secrecy. In IEEE computer security foundations workshop (CSFW1993). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society.
22. Cuppens, F., and R. Demolombe. 1997. A modal logical framework for security policies. In Proceedings of the tenth international symposium on foundations of intelligent systems (ISMIS 1997), Charlotte, 579-589.
23. Daskalopulu, A., T. Dimitrakos, and T. Maibaum. 2002. Evidence-based electronic contract performance monitoring. Group Decision and Negotiation 11(6): 469-485.
24. dos Santos, C.T., P. Quaresma, R. Vieira, and A. Isaac. 2009. Comparing argumentation frameworks for composite ontology matching. In Proceedings of the sixth international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems (ArgMAS 2009), Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 6057, 305-320. Berlin: Springer.
25. Dung, P.M. 1995. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2): 321-357.
26. Fagin, R., J. Halpern, Y. Moses, and M. Vardi. 1995. Reasoning about knowledge. Cambridge: MIT.
27. Farley, A.M., and K. Freeman. 1995. Burden of proof in legal argumentation. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL 1995), Edinburgh, 156-164.
28. Gabbay, D.M., G. Pigozzi, and J. Woods. 2003. Controlled revision - an algorithmic approach for belief revision. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(1): 3-22.
29. Gelati, J., G. Governatori, A. Rotolo, and G. Sartor. 2004. Normative autonomy and normative co-ordination: Declarative power, representation, and mandate. Artificial Intelligence and Law 12(1-2): 53-81.
30. Gordon, T.F. 1993. The pleadings game: Formalizing procedural justice. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL 1993), Amsterdam, 10-19.
31. Gordon, T.F. 1995. The pleadings game: An artificial intelligence model of procedural justice. New York: Springer.
32. Gordon, T.F., and D. Walton. 2009. Legal reasoning with argumentation schemes. In Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL 2009), Barcelona, 137-146.
33. Gordon, T.F., and D. Walton. 2010. Proof burdens and standards, argumentation in artificial intelligence. Boston: Springer.
34. Governatori, G., and A. Rotolo. 2008. Changing Legal Systems: Abrogation and Annulment Part I: Revision of Defeasible Theories. In Proceedings of the ninth international conference on deontic logic in computer science (DEON 2008), Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 5076, 3-18. Berlin: Springer.
35. Governatori, G., and A. Rotolo. 2010. Changing legal systems: Legal abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. The Logic Journal ofIGPL 18(1): 157-194.
36. Governatori, G., M. Maher, D. Billington, and G. Antoniou. 2004. Argumentation semantics for de-feasible logics. Journal of Logic and Computation 14(5): 675-702.
37. Haenni, R., B. Anrig, J. Kohlas, and N. Lehmann. 2001. A survey on probabilistic argumentation. In Proceedings of the sixth European conference on symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning with uncertainty, workshop: Adventures in argumentation, Boston, 19-25.
38. Horty, J. 1997. Nonmonotonic foundations for deontic logic. In Defeasible deontic logic, ed. D. Nute, 17-44. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
39. Laera, L., I. Blacoe, V. Tamma, T.R. Payne, J. Euzenat, and T. Bench-Capon. 2007. Argumentation over Ontology Correspondences in MAS. In Proceedings of the sixth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2007), Honolulu, 228.
40. Makinson, D.C. 1998. On a fundamental problem of deontic logic. In Norms, logics and information systems, New studies in deontic logic and computer science, ed. H. Prakken and P. McNamara, 29-54. Amsterdam: IOS.
41. Makinson, D., and L. van der Torre. 2003. Permission from an input/output perspective. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32: 391-416.
42. McBurney, P., and S. Parsons. 2000. Risk agoras: Dialectical argumentation for scientific reasoning. In Proceedings of the sixteenth conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (UAI 2000), Stanford, 371-379.
43. Medellin-Gasque, R., K. Atkinson, P. McBurney, and T. Bench-Capon. 2011. Arguments over co-operative plans. In Proceedings of the first international workshop on the theory and applications of formal argumentation (TAFA 2011), Barcelona.
44. Modgil, S., and M. Luck. 2009. Argumentation in multi-agent systems. chap. Argumentation based resolution of conflicts between desires and normative goals, 19-36. Berlin: Springer.
45. Oren, N., TJ. Norman, and A. Preece. 2007. Subjective logic and arguing with evidence. Artificial Intelligence Journal 171(10-15): 838-854.
46. Oren, N., M. Luck, and T.J. Norman. 2008. Argumentation for normative reasoning. In Proceedings of the symposium on behaviour regulation in multi-agent systems (BRMAS 2008) at AISB 2008, Aberdeen, 55-60.
47. Oren, N., M. Luck, S. Miles, and T.J. Norman. 2008. An Argumentation Inspired Heuristic for Resolving Normative Conflict. In Proceedings of the fifth workshop on coordination, organizations, institutions, and norms in agent systems (COIN@AAMAS-08), Toronto, 41-56.
48. Oren, N., M. Luck, and S. Miles. 2010. A model of normative power. In Proceedings of the ninth international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2010), Toronto, 815-822. IFAAMAS.
49. Pacuit, E., R. Parikh, and E. Cogan. 2006. The logic of knowledge based obligation. Synthese 149(2): 311-341.
50. Pollock, J. 1995. Cognitive carpentry. Cambridge: MIT.
51. Prakken, H. 1993. A logical framework for modelling legal argument. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL 1993), Amsterdam, 1-9.
52. Prakken, H. 2001. Relating protocols for dynamic dispute with logics for defeasible argumentation. Syntese 127: 187-219.
53. Prakken, H. 2005. AI & Law, logic and argument schemes. Argumentation 19(SpecialIssue on the Toulmin Model Today): 303-320.
54. Prakken, H., and G. Sartor. 1996. A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence Law 4(3-4): 331-368.
55. Prakken, H., and G. Sartor. 2002. The role of logic in computational models of legal argument: A critical survey. In Computational logic: Logic programming and beyond, 342-381. Berlin: Springer.
56. Prakken, H., and G. Sartor. 2004. The three faces of defeasibility in the law. Ratio Juris 17: 118-139.
57. Prakken, H., and G. Sartor. 2008. A logical analysis of burdens of proof. In Legal evidence and proof: Statistics, stories, logic, ed. H. Kaptein. Aldershot: Ashgate.
58. Prakken, H., and G. Vreeswijk. 2002. Logics for defeasible argumentation. In Handbook of philosophical logic, vol. 4, 2nd ed, ed. D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, 219-318. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
59. Prakken, H., C. Reed, and D. Walton. 2005. Dialogues about the burden of proof. In Proceedings of the tenth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL 2005), Bologna, 115-124.
60. Rissland, E.L., D.B. Skalak, and M.T. Friedman. 1993. BankXX: A Program to Generate Argument Through Case-Base Research. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL 1993), 117-124.
61. Searle, J.R. 1997. The construction of social reality. New York: Free Press.
62. Sergot, M.J., F. Sadri, R.A. Kowalski, F. Kriwaczek, P. Hammond, and H.T. Cory. 1986. The british nationality act as a logic program. Communications of the ACM 29(5): 370-386.
63. Stolpe, A. 2010. Norm-system revision: Theory and application. Artificial Intelligence Law 18(3): 247-283.
64. Toniolo, A., TJ. Norman, and K. Sycara. 2011. Argumentation schemes for policy-driven planning. In Proceedings of the first international workshop on the theory and applications of formal argumentation (TAFA 2011), Barcelona.
65. van der Torre, L., and Y.H. Tan. 1999. Diagnosis and decision making in normative reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7: 51-67.
66. Walton, D., and E. Krabbe. 1995. Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning, SUNY series in logic and language. Albany: State University of New York Press.