Value Based Argumentation in Hierarchical Argumentation Frameworks

Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

Volumn 144, Issue , 2006, Pages 297-308

  Modgil, S ^a  

^a IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS; PREFERENCE INFORMATION; VALUE-BASED ARGUMENTATIONS;

EID: 84940495075     PISSN: 09226389     EISSN: 18798314     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(3):429-448, 2003.
2. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reason, logic programming, and N-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321-357, 1995.
3. S. Modgil. Hierarchical argumentation. In 10th European Conf. on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA) (to appear), 2006. available at http://www.acl.icnet.uk/lab/PUBLICATIONS/ms422.pdf.
4. L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. Inferring from inconsistency in preference-based argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Automated Reasoning, Volume 29 (2):125-169, 2002.
5. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 7:25-75, 1997.
6. K. Atkinson, T. J. M. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. Persuasive political argument. In C. Reed F. Grasso and R. Kibble, editors, Proc. First International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (ArgMAS 2004), pages 44-51, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2004.
7. K. Atkinson. What Should We Do:Computational Representation of Persuasive Argument in Practical Reasoning. PhD Thesis. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK, 2005.
8. P. Besnard and A. Hunter. Practical first-order argumentation. In AAAI, pages 590-595, 2005.
9. D. N.Walton. Argument Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1996.
10. D. Hitchcock, P. McBurney, and S. Parsons. A framework for deliberation dialogues. In H. V. Hansen et.al, editor, Proc. Fourth Biennial Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA 2001), Canada, 2001.
11. S. Modgil and J. Fox. A guardian agent approach to safety in medical multi-agent systems. In Proc. of the First International Workshop on Safety and Security in Multi-Agent Systems (SAEMAS'04 at AAMAS 2004), New York, 2004.
12. L. Amgoud and S. Kaci. On generation of bipolar goals in argumentation-based negotiation. In I. Rahwan, P. Moraitis, and C. Reed, editors, Proc. 1st Int. Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, New York, New York, 2004. Springer.
13. S. Modgil. Nested argumentation and its application to decision making over actions. In Proc. Second Int. Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Netherlands, 2005.
14. G. Brewka. Well-founded semantics for extended logic programs with dynamic preferences. Jnl. of Artificial Intelligence Res., 4, 19-36, 1996
15. A. Kakas and P. Moraitis. Argumentation based decision making for autonomous agents. In Proc. Second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pages 883-890. ACM Press, 2003.
16. M. Wooldridge, P. McBurney, and S. Parsons. On the meta-logic of arguments. In AAMAS '05: Proc. Fourth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pages 560-567, NY, USA, 2005. ACM Press.