Combining sceptical epistemic reasoning with credulous practical reasoning

Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

Volumn 144, Issue , 2006, Pages 311-322

  Prakken, Henry ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

argumentation; credulous and sceptical reasoning; Practical vs. epistemic reasoning

Indexed keywords

ARGUMENTATION; CREDULOUS AND SKEPTICAL REASONING; DIALECTICAL PROOF THEORY; EPISTEMIC REASONINGS; PRACTICAL REASONING; PRACTICAL VS.; PREFERRED SEMANTICS; SOUND AND COMPLETE;

SEMANTICS;

EID: 84940557635     PISSN: 09226389     EISSN: 18798314     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. R.H. Thomason. Desires and defaults: a framework for planning with inferred goals. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pages 702-713, San Fransisco, CA, 2000. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
2. J. Broersen, M. Dastani, J. Hulstijn, and L. van der Torre. Goal generation in the BOID architecture. Cognitive Science Quarterly Journal, 2:428-447, 2002.
3. J. Fox and S. Parsons. On using arguments for reasoning about actions and values. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Qualitative Preferences in Deliberation and Practical Reasoning, Stanford, CA, 1997.
4. P. Krause, S. Ambler, M. Elvang-Gøransson, and J. Fox. A logic of argumentation for reasoning under uncertainty. Computational Intelligence, 11(1):113-131, 1995.
5. J.L. Pollock. Planning agents. In M.Wooldridge and A. Rao, editors, Foundations of Rational Agency. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1999.
6. K. Atkinson. What ShouldWe Do: Computational Representation of Persuasive Argument in Practical Reasoning. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK, 2005.
7. K. Atkinson, T.J.M. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. Computational representation of persuasive argument. Synthese, special section Knowledge, Rationality and Action. To appear.
8. D.N.Walton. Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1996.
9. L. Amgoud. A unified setting for inference and decision: an argumentation-based approach. In Proceedings of the IJCAI-2005 Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 40-43, 2005.
10. P.M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321-357, 1995.
11. P.M. Dung. Logic programming as dialog game. Unpublished paper, Division of Computer Science, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, 1994.
12. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Argument-based extended logic programming with defeasible priorities. Journal of Applied Non-classical Logics, 7:25-75, 1997.
13. G.A.W. Vreeswijk and H. Prakken. Credulous and sceptical argument games for preferred semantics. In Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Logic for Artificial Intelligence (JELIA'2000), number 1919 in Springer Lecture Notes in AI, pages 239-253, Berlin, 2000. Springer Verlag.
14. P.E. Dunne and T.J. Bench-Capon. Two party immediate response disputes: Properties and efficiency. Artificial Intelligence, 149:221-250, 2003.
15. C. Cayrol, S. Doutre, and J. Mengin. On decision problems related to the preferred semantics for argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13, 2003. 377-403.
16. P.M. Dung, R.A. Kowalski, and F. Toni. Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence, 170:114-159, 2006.
17. M. Caminada. On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation. In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Logic for Artificial Intelligence, 2006. To appear.
18. J.L. Pollock. Cognitive Carpentry. A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
19. G.A.W. Vreeswijk. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence, 90:225-279, 1997.
20. L. Amgoud, M. Caminada, C. Cayrol, S. Doutre, M.-C. Lagasquie, H. Prakken, and G.A.W. Vreeswijk. Towards a consensus formal model: inference part. Deliverable D2.2: Draft formal semantics for inference and decision-making, ASPIC Project, 2004.
21. H. Prakken. Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation, 15:1009-1040, 2005.
22. C.E. Alchourrón. Logic of norms and logic of normative propositions. Logique ét Analyse, 12:242-268, 1969.
23. J.L. Pollock. Rational choice and action omnipotence. Philosophical Review, 111:1-23, 2003.