The added value of argumentation

Agreement Technologies

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 357-403

  Modgil, Sanjay ^a   Toni, Francesca ^b   Bex, Floris ^c   Bratko, Ivan ^d   Chesñevar, Carlos I ^e   Dvořák, Wolfgang ^f   Falappa, Marcelo A ^e   Fan, Xiuyi ^b   Gaggl, Sarah Alice ^f   Garcia, Alejandro J ^e   Gonzalez, María P ^e   Gordon, Thomas F ^g   Leite, João ^h   Možina, Martin ^d   Reed, Chris ^c   Simari, Guillermo R ^e   Szeider, Stefan ^f   Torroni, Paolo ⁱ   Woltran, Stefan ^f  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^e UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DEL SUR   (Argentina)

^f VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

^g FRAUNHOFER FOKUS   (Germany)

^h UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA   (Portugal)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; LEARNING SYSTEMS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ADDED VALUES; BELIEF FUNCTION; GENERALISATION; HUMAN MODEL; HUMAN REASONING; KEY TOPICS; LOGIC-BASED MODELS;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 85031406444     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_21     Document Type: Chapter

References (124)

1. Amgoud, L. 2000. Modeling dialogues using argumentation. In ICMAS’00: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on multiAgent systems, 31. Washington: IEEE Computer Society.
2. Amgoud, L., and C. Cayrol. 2002. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 34(1-3): 197-215.
3. Amgoud, L., C. Cayrol, M. Lagasquie-Schiex, and P. Livet. 2008. On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 23(10): 1062-1093.
4. Atkinson, K. 2009. What should we do?:computational representation of persuasive argument in practical reasoning. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool.
5. Baroni, P., and M. Giacomin. 2009. Semantics of abstract argument systems. In Argumentation in artificial intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 25-44. New York: Springer.
6. Baroni, P., F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, and G. Guida. 2011. AFRA: Argumentation framework with recursive attacks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 52(1): 19-37.
7. Bench-Capon, TJ.M. 2002. Value-based argumentation frameworks. In Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on non-monotonic reasoning (NMR’02), Whistler, 443-454.
8. Bench-Capon, TJ.M. 2003. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3): 429-448.
9. Bench-Capon, TJ.M., and P.E. Dunne. 2007. Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence 171: 10-15.
10. Berg, T., T. van Gelder, F. Patterson, and S. Teppema. 2009. Critical thinking: Reasoning and communicating with rationale. Amsterdam: Pearson Education Benelux.
11. Berre, D.L., and L. Simon. 2006. Preface. Journal on Satisfiability, Boolean Modeling and Computation 2(1-4): 103-143.
12. Besnard, P., and A. Hunter. 2000. A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence 128(1-2): 203-235.
13. Besnard, P, and S. Doutre. 2004. Checking the acceptability of a set of arguments. In Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on non-monotonic reasoning (NMR’02), Whistler, 59-64.
14. Bex, F., S. Modgil, H. Prakken, and C. Reed. 2012. On logical reifications of the argument interchange format. Journal of Logic and Computation. doi: 10.1093/logcom/exs033.
15. Bistarelli, S., and F. Santini. 2010. A common computational framework for semiring-based argumentation systems. In Proceedings of the 19th European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI’10), Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol. 215, ed. H. Coelho, R. Studer, and M. Wooldridge, 131-136. Amsterdam: IOS.
16. Bochman, A. 2003. Collective argumentation and disjunctive programming. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3): 405-428.
17. Bondarenko, A., P. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. 1997. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 93(1-2): 63-101.
18. Bratko, I., J. Zabkar, and M. MoZabkarina. 2009. Argument based machine learning. In Argumentation in artificial intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 463-482. New York: Springer.
19. Caminada, M., and L. Amgoud. 2007. On the evaluation of argumentation formalisms. Artificial Intelligence 171(5-6): 286-310.
20. Cayrol, C., and M.C. Lagasquie-Schiex. 2005. Graduality in argumentation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 23: 245-297.
21. Chesñevar, C., J. McGinnis, S. Modgil, I. Rahwan, C. Reed, G. Simari, M. South, G. Vreeswijk, and S. Willmott. 2006. Towards an argument interchange format. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21: 293-316.
22. Chesñevar, C., A. Maguitman, and M.P. González. 2009. Empowering recommendation technologies through argumentation. In Argumentation in artificial intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 403-422. New York: Springer.
23. Clark, P., and R. Boswell. 1991. Rule induction with CN2: Some recent improvements. In Machine learning - Proceeding of the fifth Europen conference (EWSL-91), Berlin, 151-163.
24. Denecker, M., J. Vennekens, S. Bond, M. Gebser, and M. Truszczynski. 2009. The second answer set programming competition. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning (LPNMR 2009), LNCS, vol. 5753, ed. E. Erdem, F. Lin, and T. Schaub, 637-654. Berlin: Springer.
25. Dung, P.M. 1993. An argumentation semantics for logic programming with explicit negation. In Proceedings of the tenth logic programming conference, 616-630. Cambridge: MIT
26. Dung, P., R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. 2006. Dialectic proof procedures for assumption-based, admissible argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 170: 114-159.
27. Dung, P., P. Mancarella, and F. Toni. 2007. Computing ideal sceptical argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15): 642-674. Specialissue on argumentation in artificial intelligence.
28. Dung, P., R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. 2009. Assumption-based argumentation. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 199-218. Berlin: Springer.
29. Dung, P.M., P.M. Thang, and F. Toni. 2008. Towards argumentation-based contract negotiation. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’08). Amsterdam: IOS.
30. 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): 321-358.
31. Dung, P.M., P.M. Thang, and N.D. Hung. 2009. Argument-based decision making and negotiation in e-business: Contracting a land lease for a computer assembly plant. In Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on computational logic in multi-agent systems (CLIMA IX), Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 5405, ed. M. Fisher, F. Sadri, and M. Thielscher, 154-172. Berlin: Springer.
32. Dunne, P.E., T Hunter, P. McBurney, S. Parsons, and M. Wooldridge. 2011. Weighted argument systems: Basic definitions, algorithms, and complexity results. Artificial Intelligence 175: 457-486.
33. Dvoíák, W., S. Ordyniak, and S. Szeider. 2012a. Augmenting tractable fragments of abstract argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 186: 157-173.
34. Dvorák, W., Pichler P, and S. Woltran. 2012b. Towards fixed-parameter tractable algorithms for abstract argumentation. Artificial Intelligence 186: 1-37.
35. Egly, U., and S. Woltran. 2006. Reasoning in argumentation frameworks using quantified boolean formulas. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’06), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 144, ed. P.E. Dunne and TJ.M. Bench-Capon, 133-144. Amsterdam: IOS.
36. Egly, U., S.A. Gaggl, and S. Woltran. 2010. Answer-set programming encodings for argumentation frameworks. Argument and Computation 1(2): 147-177.
37. Ennals, R., B. Trushkowsky, J.M. Agosta. 2010. Highlighting disputed claims on the web. In Proceedings of the 19th WWW, 341-350. New York: ACM.
38. Falappa, M., A. García, G. Kern-Isberner, and G. Simari. 2011. On the evolving relation between belief revision and argumentation. Knowledge Engineering Review 26(1): 35-43.
39. Falappa, M., G. Kern-Isberner, and G.R. Simari. 2009. Argumentation in artificial intelligence, chap. Belief revision and argumentation Theory, ed. I. Rahwan, G.R. Simari, 341-360. New York: Springer.
40. Fan, X., and F. Toni. 2011. Assumption-based argumentation dialogues. In Proceedings of the IJCAI2011, Pasadena.
41. Fan, X., and F. Toni. 2012a. Agent strategies for aba-based information-seeking and inquiry dialogues. In Proceedings of the ECA(2012), Montpellier.
42. Fan, X., and F. Toni. 2012b. Argumentation dialogues fortwo-agent conflict resolution. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA12), Amsterdam: IOS.
43. Fan, X., and F. Toni. 2012c. Mechanism design for argumentation-based persuasion dialogues. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA12), Amsterdam: IOS.
44. Feigenbaum, E.A. 2003. Some challenges and grand challenges for computational intelligence. Source Journal of the ACM 50(1): 32-40.
45. Ferretti, E., M. Errecalde, A. García, and G.R. Simari. 2008. Decision rules and arguments in defeasible decision making. In Proceedings ofthe 2nd international conference on computational models of arguments (COMMA), Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol. 172, ed. P. Besnard et al., 171-182. Amsterdam: IOS.
46. Fox, J., D. Glasspool, D. Grecu, S. Modgil, M. South, V. Patkar. 2007. Argumentation-based inference and decision making-a medical perspective. IEEE Intelligent Systems 22(6): 34-41. doi:10.1109/MIS.2007.102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2007.102.
47. García, A., and G. Simari. 2004. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1): 95-138.
48. García, A., N. Rotstein, M. Tucat, and G.R. Simari. 2007. An argumentative reasoning service for deliberative agents. In KSEM 2007, LNAI, vol. 4798, 128-139. Berlin: Springer.
49. García, A.J., Rotstein, N., Chesñevar, C., Simari, G.R.: Explaining why something is warranted in defeasible logic programming. In ExaCt, Copenhagen, ed. T.R.B. et al., 25-36.
50. García, D., S. Gottifredi, P. Krümpelmann, M. Thimm, G. Kern-Isberner, M. Falappa, and A. García. 2011. On influence and contractions in defeasible logic programming. In LPNMR, Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 6645, ed. J.P. Delgrande and W. Faber, 199-204. Berlin: Springer.
51. Girle, R., D. Hitchcock, P. McBurney, and B. Verheij. 2003. Argumentation machines. New frontiers in argument and computation, chap. Decision support for practical reasoning: A theoretical and computational perspective, 55-84. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
52. Glasspool, D., A. Oettinger, J. Smith-Spark, F. Castillo, V. Monaghan, and J. Fox. 2007. Supporting medical planning by mitigating cognitive load. Methods of Information in Medicine 46: 636-640.
53. Godbole, N., M. Srinivasaiah, and S. Skiena. 2007. Large-scale sentiment analysis for news and blogs. In Proceedings of the international Conference on weblogs and social media (ICWSM), Salt Lake City.
54. González, M., J. Lorés, and T. Granollers. 2008. Enhancing usability testing through datamining techniques: A novel approach to detecting usability problem patterns for a context of use. Information and Software Technology 50(6): 547-568.
55. González, M., C. Chesñevar, N. Pinwart, M. Gomez Lucero. Developing argument assistant systems from usability viewpoint. In Proceedings of the international conference on knowledge management and information sharing, Valencia, 157-163. INSTICC.
56. González, M.P., S. Gottifredi, A.J. García, and G.R. Simari. 2011. Towards argument representational tools for hybrid argumentation systems. In HCI (12), Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 6772, ed. G. Salvendy and M.J. Smith, 236-245. Berlin: Springer.
57. Gordon, T.F. 1995. The pleadings game. An artificial intelligence model of procedural justice. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic.
58. Gordon, TF, and D. Walton. 2006. The Carneades argumentation framework - using presumptions and exceptions to model critical questions. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’06), Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol. 144, ed. P.E. Dunne and TJ.M. Bench-Capon, 195-207. Amsterdam: IOS.
59. Governatori, G., and M.J. Maher. 2000. An argumentation-theoretic characterization of defeasible logic. In Proceedings of the fourteenth European conference on artificial intelligence, Berlin, 469-473.
60. Groznik, V., M. Guid, A. Sadikov, M. Mozina, D. Georgijev, V. Kragelj, S. Ribaric, Z. Pirtosek, and I. Bratko. 2011. Elicitation of neurological knowledge with ABML. In Proceedings of the 13th conference on artificial intelligence in medicine (AIME’11), Bled, July 2-6, 2011.
61. Hamblin, C.L. 1971. Mathematical models of dialogue. Theoria 37: 130-155.
62. Heras, S., K. Atkinson, V.J. Botti, F. Grasso, V. Julian, and P. McBurney. 2010. How argumentation can enhance dialogues in social networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’10), Desenzano del Garda, September 8-10, 2010, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 216, ed. P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, and G.R. Simari, 267-274. Amsterdam: IOS.
63. Hoos, H.H., and T. Stutzle. 2000. SATLIB: An online resource for research on SAT. In Proceedings of the SAT 2000, 283-292. Amsterdam: IOS.
64. Hussain, A., and F. Toni. 2008. On the benefits of argumentation for negotiation - preliminary version. In Proceedings of 6th European workshop on multi-agent systems (EUMAS-2008), Bath.
65. Jennings, N.R., P. Faratin, A.R. Lomuscio, S. Parsons, C. Sierra, and M. Wooldridge. 2001. Automated negotiation: Prospects, methods and challenges. Group Decision and Negotiation 10(2): 199-215.
66. Kirschner, P.A., S.J. Buckingham Shum, and C.S. Carr (eds.). 2003. Visualizing argumentation: Software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making. Springer, London. http://oro. open.ac.uk/12107/.
67. Langley, P., and H.A. Simon. 1995. Applications of machine learning and rule induction. Communications of the ACM 38(11): 54-64. doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/219717.219768.
68. Leite, J., and J. Martins. 2011. Social abstract argumentation. In IJCAI 2011, Proceedings of the 22nd international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Barcelona, Catalonia, July 16-22, 2011, pp. 2287-2292. IJCAI/AAAI.
69. Lucero, M.G., C. Chesnevar, and Simari, G.R. 2009. On the accrual of arguments in defeasible logic programming. In IJCAI, Pasadena, ed. C. Boutilier, 804-809.
70. Mackenzie, J. 1990. Four dialogue systems. Studia Logica 49(4): 567-583.
71. Matt, P.A., and Toni, F. 2008. A game-theoretic measure of argument strength for abstract argumentation. In 11th European conference on logics in artificial intelligence, Dresden.
72. Matt, P.A., F. Toni, T. Stournaras, D. Dimitrelos. 2008. Argumentation-based agents for eprocure-ment. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2008) - Industry and applications track, Estoril, ed. M. Berger, B. Burg, and S. Nishiyama, 71-74.
73. Matt, P.A., F. Toni, and J. Vaccari. 2009. Dominant decisions by argumentation agents, argumentation in multi-agent systems. In ArgMAS 2009, Budapest, ed. P. McBurney, S. Parson, I. Rawan, and N. Maudet.
74. Matt, P.A., M. Morge, and F. Toni. 2010. Combining statistics and arguments to compute trust. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2010), Toronto, ed. W. van der Hoek and G.A. Kaminka.
75. McGinnis, J., K. Stathis, and F. Toni. 2011. A formal model of agent-oriented virtual organisations and their formation. Multiagent and Grid Systems 7(6): 291-310.
76. Mercier, H., and Sperber, D. 2011. Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34(2): 57-74.
77. Mitchell, T. 1997. Machine learning. McGraw-Hill Education (ISE Editions). http://www.amazon. ca/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=citeulike09-20&path=ASIN/0071154671.
78. Modgil, S. 2009. Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence 173(9-10): 901-934.
79. Modgil, S., and T. Bench-Capon. 2011. Metalevel argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 21: 959-1003.
80. Modgil, S., and M. Caminada. 2009. Proof theories and algorithms for abstract argumentation frameworks. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 105-129. Springer.
81. Modgil, S., and H. Prakken. 2012. A general account of argumentation and preferences. Artificial Intelligence. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2012.10.008, 2012.
82. Moguillansky, M., N. Rotstein, M. Falappa, A. García, and G.R. Simari. 2008. Argument theory change: Revision upon warrant. In Proceedings of the twenty-third conference on artificial intelligence, AAAI 2008, Chicago, 132-137.
83. Moguillansky, M., N. Rotstein, M. Falappa, A. García, and G.R. Simari. 2010. Argument theory change through defeater activation. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’10), Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol. 216, ed. P Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, and G.R. Simari, 359-366. Amsterdam: IOS.
84. Mozina, M. 2009. Argument based machine learning. Ph.D. thesis, University of Ljubljana: Faculty of Computer and Information Science, Ljubljana.
85. Mozina, M., M. Guid, J. Krivec, A. Sadikov, and I. Bratko. 2008. Fighting knowledge acquisition bottleneck with argument based machine learning. In The 18th European conference on artificial intelligence (ECAI), Patras, 234-238.
86. Mozina, M., M. Guid, J. Krivec, A. Sadikov, and I. Bratko. 2010. Learning to explain with ABML. In Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on explanation-aware computing (ExaCt’2010), Lisbon, pp. 37-49, ISNN 1613-0073. CEUR-WS.org.
87. Mozina, M., J. Zabkar, and I. Bratko. 2007. Argument based machine learning. Artificial Intelligence 171(10/15): 922-937.
88. Niemela, I. 1999. Logic programming with stable model semantics as a constraint programming paradigm. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25(3-4): 241-273.
89. Pang, B., and L. Lee. 2008. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 2(1-2): 1-135.
90. Podlaszewski, M., M. Caminada, and G. Pigozzi. 2011. An implementation of basic argumentation components (demonstration). In Proceedings AAMAS 2011, Taipei, 1307-1308.
91. Prakken, H. 2001. Modelling reasoning about evidence in legal procedure. In Proceedings of the eighth international conference on artificial intelligence and law (ICAIL-01), 119-128. New York: ACM Press.
92. Prakken, H. 2005. Coherence and flexibility in dialogue games for argumentation. Journal of Logic and Computation 15(6): 1009-1040.
93. Prakken, H. 2010. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1(2): 93-124.
94. Rahwan, I., S.D. Ramchurn, N.R. Jennings, P. McBurney, S. Parsons, and L. Sonenberg. 2004. Argumentation-based negotiation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(4): 343-375.
95. Rahwan, I., and C. Reed. 2009. The argument interchange format. In Argumentation in artificial intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 383-402. New York: Springer.
96. Rahwan, I., F. Zablith, and C. Reed. 2007. Laying the foundations for a world wide argument web. Artificial Intelligence 171: 897-921.
97. Reed, C., and G. Rowe. 2004. Araucaria: Software for argument analysis. Diagramming and representation. International Journal of AI Tools 13(4): 961-980.
98. Reed, C., S. Wells, K. Budzynska, J. Devereux. 2010. Building arguments with argumentation: The role of illocutionary force in computational models of argument. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’10), Desenzano del Garda. Amsterdam: IOS.
99. Rotstein, N., M. Moguillansky, M. Falappa, A. García, and G.R. Simari. 2008. Argument theory change: Revision upon Warrant. In Proceedings of the international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’08), Toulouse, 336-347. Amsterdam: IOS.
100. Sadikov, A., M. Mozina, M. Guid, J. Krivec, and I. Bratko. 2006. Automated chess tutor. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on computers and games, Turin.
101. Schneider, J., A. Passant, T. Groza, and J.G. Breslin. 2010. Argumentation 3.0: How semantic web technologies can improve argumentation modeling in web 2.0 environments. In Proceedings of the international conference on computational models of argument (COMMA’10), Desenzano del Garda, September 8-10, 2010, Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, vol. 216, ed. P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, and G.R. Simari, 439-446. Amsterdam: IOS.
102. Shafer, G. 1985. Probability judgment in artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the first annual conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (UAI’85), Los Angeles, ed. L.N. Kanal and J.F. Lemmer, 127-136. Elsevier.
103. Snaith, M., J. Lawrence, and C. Reed. 2010. Mixed initiative argument in public deliberation. In ed. F. De Cindio et al., From e-Participation to online deliberation, proceedings of OD2010, Leeds.
104. Tolchinsky, P, U. Cortés, S. Modgil, F. Caballero, and A. Lopez-Navidad. 2006a. Increasing the availability of human organs for transplantation through argumentation based deliberation among agents. IEEE SpecialIssue on Intelligent Agents in Healthcare 21(6): 30-37.
105. Tolchinsky, P., S. Modgil, U. Cortés, M. Sánchez-Marré. 2006b. Cbr and argument schemes for collaborative decision making. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computational models of argument, pp. 71-82. Liverpool: IOS.
106. Tolchinsky, P., S. Modgil, K. Atkinson, P. McBurney, U. Cortes. 2012. Deliberation dialogues for reasoning about safety critical actions. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (JAAMAS) 25: 209-259.
107. Toni, F. 2008. Argumentative KGP agents for service composition. In Proceedings of the AITA08, architectures for intelligent theory-based Agents, AAAI spring symposium, Stanford University, ed. M. Balduccini and C. Baral.
108. Toni, F. 2010. Argumentative agents. In Proceedings of the international multiconference on computer science and information technology, 223-229. Piscataway: IEEE.
109. Toni, F., and M. Sergot. 2011. Argumentation and ASP. In LP, KR, andNMR: Essays in honor of michael gelfond. Berlin: Springer.
110. Toni, F., and P. Torroni. 2012. Bottom-up argumentation. In First international workshop on theory and application, TAFA 2011, Barcelona, July 16-17, 2011, Revised selected papers, Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 7132, ed. S. Modgil, N. Oren, and F. Toni, 249-262. Berlin: Springer.
111. Toni, F., M. Grammatikou, S. Kafetzoglou, L. Lymberopoulos, S. Papavassileiou, D. Gaertner, M. Morge, S. Bromuri, J. McGinnis, K. Stathis, V. Curcin, M. Ghanem, and L. Guo. 2008. The ArguGRID platform: An overview. In Proceedings of grid economics and business models, 5th international workshop (GECON 2008), Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 5206, ed. J. Altmann, D. Neumann, and T. Fahringer, 217-225. Berlin: Springer.
112. Torroni, P., M. Gavanelli, and F. Chesani. 2009. Arguing on the semantic grid. In Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. I. Rahwan and G. Simari, 423-441. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0\_21.
113. Torroni, P., M. Prandini, M. Ramilli, J. Leite, and J. Martins. 2010. Arguments against the troll. In Proceedings of the eleventh AIIA symposium on artificial Intelligence, Brescia, Arti Grafiche Apollonio, 232-235.
114. Toulmin, S. 1958. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
115. van Veenen, J., and H. Prakken. 2006. A protocol for arguing about rejections in negotiation. In Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on argumentation in multi-agent systems (ArgMAS 2005), affiliated toAAMAS 2005, Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 4049, ed. S. Parsons, N. Maudet, P. Moraitis, and I. Rahwan, 138-153. Berlin: Springer.
116. Verheij, B. 2003. Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation. Artificial intelligence 150(1-2): 291-324.
117. Verheij, B. 2007. A labeling approach to the computation of credulous acceptance in argumentation. In Proceedings of the 20th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI 2007), Hyderabad, ed. M.M. Veloso, 623-628.
118. Walton, D.N. 1996. Argument schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
119. Walton, D.N., and E.C.W. Krabbe. 1995. Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. SUNY series in logic and language. Albany: State University of New York.
120. Walton, D.N., C. Reed, and F. Macagno. 2008.Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
121. Webb, G.I., J. Wells, and Z. Zheng. 1999. An experimental evaluation of integrating machine learning with knowledge acquisition. Machine Learning 35(1): 5-23. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1007504102006.
122. Wells, S., C. Gourlay, and C. Reed. 2009. Argument blogging. In 9th international workshop on computational models of natural argument, Pasadena.
123. Wooldridge, M. 2003. Properties and complexity of some formal inter-agent dialogues. Journal of Logic and Computation 13: 347-376.
124. Yu, B., and M.P. Singh. 2002. Distributed reputation management for electronic commerce. Computational Intelligence 18(4): 535-549.