Microdebates App for Android: A Tool for Participating in Argumentative Online Debates Using a Handheld Device

Proceedings - International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, ICTAI

Volumn 2014-December, Issue , 2014, Pages 792-799

  Yaglikci, Nefise ^a   Torroni, Paolo ^b  

^a TOBB UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND TECHNOLOGY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Android; argumentation; collective intelligence; Microdebates; mobile application; online communities; Online debate; opinions; participation; social media; Social networks; Twitter

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTATION THEORY; HAND HELD COMPUTERS; ONLINE SYSTEMS; SEMANTICS; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

ANDROID; ARGUMENTATION; COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCES; MICRODEBATES; MOBILE APPLICATIONS; ON-LINE COMMUNITIES; ONLINE DEBATE; OPINIONS; PARTICIPATION; SOCIAL MEDIA; TWITTER;

ANDROID (OPERATING SYSTEM);

EID: 84946544559     PISSN: 10823409     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/ICTAI.2014.122     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. A. De Liddo and S. Buckingham Shum, "Improving online deliberation with argument network visualization," in Workshop: Digital Cities 8 at 6th C&T, Munich, Germany, 2013.
2. S. B. Shum, "The roots of computer supported argument visualization," in Visualizing Argumentation, Springer, 2003, pp. 3-24.
3. I. Rahwan and G. R. Simari, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, 1st ed. Springer, 2009.
4. A. De Liddo and S. Buckingham Shum, "The evidence hub: Harnessing the collective intelligence of communities to build evidence-based knowledge," in Workshop: Large Scale Ideation and Deliberation at 6th C&T, Munich, 2013.
5. W. Kunz and H. W. J. Rittel, "Issues as elements of information systems," Institute of Urban & Regional Development, University of California, Working Paper 131, Jul. 1970.
6. S. Buckingham Shum, "Cohere: Towards web 2.0 argumentation," in Proc. 2nd COMMA, FAIA 172. IOS, 2008, pp. 97-108.
7. P. Baroni, M. Romano, F. Toni, M. Aurisicchio, and G. Bertanza, "An argumentation-based approach for automatic evaluation of design debates," in Proc. CLIMA, LNCS 8143, Springer, 2013, pp. 340-356.
8. P. Torroni, M. Gavanelli, and F. Chesani, "Arguing on the semantic grid," in Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Springer, 2009.
9. J. Schneider, T. Groza, and A. Passant, "A review of argumentation for the social semantic web," Semantic Web, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 159-218, 01 2013.
10. D. Cartwright and K. Atkinson, "Political engagement through tools for argumentation," in Proc. 2nd COMMA, FAIA 172. IOS, 2008, pp. 116-127.
11. F. Bex, J. Lawrence, M. Snaith, and C. Reed, "Implementing the argument web," Commun. ACM, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 66-73, 2013.
12. C. I. Chesnevar, A. G. Maguitman, E. Estvez, and R. Brena, "Integrating argumentation technologies and context-based search for intelligent processing of citizens' opinion in social media," in Proc. of ICEGOV 2012, Albany, NY, Oct. 2012, pp. 166-170.
13. K. Grosse, C. I. Chesnevar, and A. G. Maguitman, "An argument-based approach to mining opinions from Twitter," in Proc. 1st AT, CEUR-WS 918, 2012, pp. 408-422.
14. K. M. DeVoe, "Bursts of information: Microblogging," The Reference Librarian, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 212-214, 2009.
15. A. Java, X. Song, T. Finin, and B. Tseng, "Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities," in Proc. Web mining and social network analysis. ACM, 2007, pp. 56-65.
16. B. A. Huberman, D. M. Romero, and F. Wu, "Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope," First Monday, vol. 14, no. 1, January 2009.
17. A. W. Rivadeneira, D. M. Gruen, M. J. Muller, and D. R. Millen, "Getting our head in the clouds: Toward evaluation studies of tagclouds," in Proc. Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '07. ACM, 2007, pp. 995-998.
18. S. Gabbriellini and P. Torroni, "Large scale agreements via microdebates," in Proc. 1st AT, CEUR-WS 918, 2012, pp. 366-377.
19. -, "Microdebates: Structuring debates without a structuring tool," in AI Commun., in press.
20. P. M. Dung, "On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games," Artif. Intell., vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 321-358, 1995.
21. S. Bistarelli and F. Santini, "A common computational framework for semiring-based argumentation systems," in Proc. ECAI, FAIA 215. IOS, 2010, pp. 131-136.
22. -, "Conarg: A constraint-based computational framework for argumentation systems," in Proc. ICTAI. IEEE, 2011, pp. 605-612.
23. P. E. Dunne, A. Hunter, P. McBurney, S. Parsons, and M. Wooldridge, "Inconsistency tolerance in weighted argument systems," in Proc. AAMAS. IFAAMAS, 2009, pp. 851-858.
24. S. Bistarelli, U. Montanari, and F. Rossi, "Semiring-based constraint satisfaction and optimization," J. ACM, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 201-236, 1997.
25. M. Correia, J. Cruz, and J. Leite, "On the Efficient Implementation of Social Abstract Argumentation," in Proc. ECAI, FAIA 263. IOS, 2014, pp. 225-230.
26. J. Feinberg, "Wordle," in Beautiful Visualization: Looking at Data through the Eyes of Experts, N. I. Julie Steele, Ed. O'Reilly, Apr. 2010.
27. S. Bistarelli, F. Rossi, and F. Santini, "A first comparison of abstract argumentation systems: A computational perspective," in Proc. ECAI, FAIA 271. IOS, 2014, pp. 969-970.