An argumentation framework for merging conflicting knowledge bases

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2424 LNAI, Issue , 2002, Pages 27-37

  Amgoud, Leila ^a   Parsons, Simon ^b  

^a IRIT   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; MERGING; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

ARGUMENTATION FRAMEWORKS; KNOWLEDGE BASE; KNOWLEDGE BASIS; MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; MULTIPLE SOURCE; PREFERENCE RELATION;

INTELLIGENT AGENTS;

EID: 85099426945     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45757-7_3     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. L. Amgoud and C. Cayrol. A reasoning model based on the production of acceptable arguments. In Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, To appear in 2002.
2. L. Amgoud, N. Maudet, and S. Parsons. Modelling dialogues using argumentation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, ICMAS, Boston, MA, 2000.
3. L. Amgoud and S. Parsons. An argumentation framework for reasoning with conflicting bases. In Technical Report, Department of Electronic Engineering, Queen Mary and Westfield College, 2000.
4. S. Benferhat, D. Dubois, and H. Prade. Argumentative inference in uncertain and inconsistent knowledge bases. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 411-419, 1993.
5. C. Cayrol, V. Royer, and C. Saurel. Management of preferences in assumption-based reasoning. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (B. Bouchon-Meunier, L. Valverde, R.Y. Yager Eds.), 13-22, 1993.
6. C. Cayrol. On the relation between argumentation and non-monotonic coherence-based entailment. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1443-1448, 1995.
7. C. I. Chesnevar, A. Maguitman, and R. P. Loui. Logical models of arguments. ACM Computing Surveys, 32(4):337-383, 2000.
8. L. Cholvy. A general framework for reasoning about contradictory information and some of its applications. In Proceedings of the ECAI workshop.
9. M. Dalal. Investigations into a theory of knowledge base revision: preliminary report. In Proceedings of AAAI'88, pages 475-479, 1988.
10. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games, volume 77.
11. M. Elvang-Goransson and A. Hunter. Argumentative logics: Reasoning with classically inconsistent information. In Data and Knowledge Engineering, volume 16.
12. S. Konieczny and R. Pino Perez. On the logic of merging. In Proceedings of KR'98, pages 488-498, 1998.
13. J. Lin and A. O. Mendelzon. Merging databases under constraints, volume 7.
14. J. Lin. Integration of weighted knowledge bases, volume 83.
15. H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk. Logics for defeasible argumentation. D. Gabbay (ed.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edition. Kluwer Academic Publishers, to appear, 4, 2001.
16. N. Rescher and R. Manor. On inference from inconsistent premises, volume 1.
17. P. Z. Revescz. On the semantics of arbitration. international journal of algebra and computation. In International journal of Algebra and Computation, volume 7.